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 1GexrZ-0003L9-I0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:57:25 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9VHtBVs015381; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:55:11 GMT Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz (gw.top-hosting.cz [81.0.254.91]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9VHpD78026173 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:51:13 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E52F5367C8 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:51:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.top-hosting.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 10262-01-5 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:51:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.0.1] (unknown [88.103.51.30]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 383AC535EDB for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:51:02 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <45478D02.3060504@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:50:58 +0100 From: Jakub Moc User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20061014) 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: Re: [gentoo-dev] Only you can prevent broken portage trees References: <45468ED1.8050107@gentoo.org> <20061031003334.50376630@snowdrop.home> <200610310857.02169.linux@quanteam.info> <20061031150236.7b080211@snowdrop.home> <454773F6.9020605@gentoo.org> <20061031163244.2ffd9201@blashyrk> <45478062.7080109@gentoo.org> <20061031170521.6b650cc9@blashyrk> <45478562.3000706@gentoo.org> <20061031173853.247a820b@blashyrk> In-Reply-To: <20061031173853.247a820b@blashyrk> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.0 OpenPGP: url=http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigFD2C19E234CBB2F5E482710F" X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.3 (20050822) at top-hosting.cz X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.161 tagged_above=-999 required=6 tests=[AWL=0.438, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -2.161 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: aefbb760-768c-42d5-aaa3-d51c544dd956 X-Archives-Hash: 5f80a69ff8a58ec10da465d44e45d0ff This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigFD2C19E234CBB2F5E482710F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stephen Bennett napsal(a): > On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:18:26 +0100 > Jakub Moc wrote: >=20 >> Sure I did... Could you tell me why should we accumulate broken and >> vulnerable junk in the tree for years? (Outdated ebuild A depends on >> junky outdated ebuild B which depends on crappy, unsupported ebuilds >> C, D and E which... ) >=20 > To avoid breaking the dep tree for users. Quite simple really. Ah. That's apparently much more important than not breaking users by providing them w/ non-vulnerable, decently uptodate stuff that's not ridden by tons of bugs. Yup. :P --=20 Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:jakub@gentoo.org GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=3Dget&search=3D0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3= D9E ... still no signature ;) --------------enigFD2C19E234CBB2F5E482710F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFR40ChxfV/c66PZ4RA8J5AJ9vriHULlSAgsKfoozzbTBBZ6DGugCgtoLC /eJ0xbnPld1zN0NdBY35gE8= =xYum -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigFD2C19E234CBB2F5E482710F-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list