public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: Arthur Zamarin <arthurzam@gentoo.org>
Subject: nomenclature, was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Arch Status and Future Plans
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 21:47:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3227107.5fSG56mABF@pinacolada> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <75654daa-c5fc-45c8-a104-fae43b9ca490@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2547 bytes --]

> As you all know, Gentoo supports many various arches, in various degrees
> (stable, dev, exp). Let me explain those 3 statuses fast:
> 
> * stable arch - meaning we have stable profile for this arch, and stable
> keywords across base-system + varying degree of seriousness. We stable
> stuff after ~30 days in tree, and are mostly happy. For example the well
> known and common amd64 arch.
> 
> * dev arch - meaning we have complete dep-tree (no broken dep-trees),
> but no stable profile. If you break here a package (for example
> introduce new dep, previously unkeyworded) you are expected to dekeyword
> and ask for rekeywording. For example the nearly unknown arch s390.
> 
> * exp arch - meaning we support what we support, with possible broken
> dep-tree. This is the "scary" state of arch, since it can break at any
> moment. For example the noisy (because of the physical fans) arch alpha.

This classification is good enough for practical purposes (and for the
discussion of the status of architectures) but technically not correct.

I'll try to clarify below, but mostly to clean up confusion about wording.

You have to keep apart two things, A) architecture status, and B) profile
status, which are formally independent of each other.

A) architecture status, defined in profiles/arches.desc

A.1) stable
amd64, arm, arm64, hppa, ppc, ppc64, sparc, x86
Architectures that have a stable keyword and where packages undergo stabilization.

A.2) transitional
(currently none)
Architectures that have a stable keyword and where packages undergo stabilization, 
but the dependency tree is only consistent for ~arch.
This is useful for upgrading architectures to stable.

A.3) testing
all other
Architectures that only have testing, ~arch keywords

B) profile status, defined in profiles/profiles.desc

B.1) stable
The dependency tree is checked and enforced by the CI and by pkgcheck by default.
Unsatisfied dependencies etc generate errors and "break the tree".

B.2) dev
The dependency tree is checked by the CI and by pkgcheck (by default).
Unsatisfied dependencies etc generate warnings.

B.3) exp
No checking (by default)

Many combinations of these two properties exist. For example, 

amd64:
is A.1 and has many B.1 profiles (but also some B.2 and B.3)

loong:
is A.3 and has B.1, B.2, B.3 profiles

m68k:
is A.3 and has only B.3 profiles



-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
dilfridge@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer
(council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-06-26 19:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-25 17:33 [gentoo-dev] Arch Status and Future Plans Arthur Zamarin
2024-06-25 21:40 ` matoro
2024-06-25 22:55 ` James Le Cuirot
2024-06-26  0:06 ` Notion of stable depgraph vs stable keywords (Re: [gentoo-dev] Arch Status and Future Plans) Sam James
2024-06-28  4:17   ` [gentoo-dev] Re: Notion of stable depgraph vs stable keywords (Re: " Duncan
2024-06-28  5:16     ` Sam James
2024-06-26  0:14 ` Misc arch plans (Re: [gentoo-dev] " Sam James
2024-06-26 20:29   ` ia64, was: " Andreas K. Huettel
2024-06-26 20:45     ` matoro
2024-06-26  0:17 ` On the value (or not?) of stable keywords " Sam James
2024-06-26  0:19 ` time64 & LFS for 32-bit arches " Sam James
2024-06-26  0:20 ` x86 FP issues " Sam James
2024-06-28  5:20   ` Michał Górny
2024-06-26  7:38 ` [gentoo-dev] Re: Arch Status and Future Plans Florian Schmaus
2024-06-26  8:29   ` Christian Bricart
2024-06-26 20:44   ` Immolo
2024-06-26 19:47 ` Andreas K. Huettel [this message]
2024-06-26 20:18 ` [gentoo-dev] " Andreas K. Huettel
2024-06-26 20:24 ` riscv, was: " Andreas K. Huettel
2024-06-26 21:08 ` 32bit vs 64bit, " Andreas K. Huettel
2024-06-28 16:12 ` splitting keywords, " Andreas K. Huettel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=3227107.5fSG56mABF@pinacolada \
    --to=dilfridge@gentoo.org \
    --cc=arthurzam@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox