From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1G28fa-0006X0-5h for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:36:34 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k6GFZAa8016870; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:35:10 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k6GFVt17027477 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 15:31:58 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 559E964FB1 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 13:30:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24818-02-6 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 13:30:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nz-out-0102.google.com (nz-out-0102.google.com [64.233.162.206]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F5EB529E for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2006 06:06:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by nz-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id j2so328251nzf for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2006 23:06:37 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=a4Nu8A1iOOA9mB7wtUv/ZE2xZXilT0WE+8rg3ldmBVxxMg3az+KjAq5OlPLesft+C7IyuzsoGrsyCzWANBJ6m3tWqMm7p0M8jfxAEr5EefGEW+khpVG9PkYJvoaPE2H/xGDkzPUjJLykJNkm7rX/xbGQWiXDtcD1n3LxdRgiv5w= Received: by 10.36.105.17 with SMTP id d17mr917837nzc; Sat, 15 Jul 2006 23:06:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.0.102? ( [24.72.114.127]) by mx.gmail.com with ESMTP id 17sm1254363nzo.2006.07.15.23.06.35; Sat, 15 Jul 2006 23:06:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <44B9D76D.20601@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:06:37 -0600 From: R Hill User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060603) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.1.1 testing/stablization and glibc 2.4 References: <1151445376.16111.28.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <1151849599.9102.16.camel@vertigo.twi-31o2.org> In-Reply-To: <1151849599.9102.16.camel@vertigo.twi-31o2.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 OpenPGP: id=9232ECA5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.416 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.017, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE=0.2] X-Spam-Score: -2.416 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: f8728720-f9d9-4f27-a072-e1dad693aa66 X-Archives-Hash: a357f2a307e910306f78e6338aa5dcb7 (apologies in advance if this goes through twice) Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 12:18 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: >> Should arch testers start working with 4.1.1 then? And do you want bugs to >> block #117482? > Arch testers should contact their architecture's leads or Release > Engineering Architecture Coordinator. As for bug reports, yes. Just an update - I've finished most major desktop stuff for x86 without any problems. I'm moving onto stuff that's already on the tracker and is fixed in testing but not stable. Rather than open and track a ton of new bugs, I'd like to reopen the original ~arch bugs and request a backport or stabilization at the maintainer's discretion. Is this okay, or would people rather get a shiny new bug? Keep in mind there are already 290 bugs on the tracker. Alternatively, would it be better to just start a new tracker bug for stabilization? https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482 --de. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list