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 1Gey9u-0005xm-Cg for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:16:22 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9VIEMeA028869; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:14:22 GMT Received: from egr.msu.edu (jeeves.egr.msu.edu [35.9.37.127]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9VIAQ5W006432 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:10:26 GMT Received: from [35.9.22.159] (cse498t10c.cse.msu.edu [35.9.22.159]) (authenticated bits=0) by egr.msu.edu (8.13.7/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k9VIAQmO013436 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:10:26 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4547917D.9020009@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:10:05 -0500 From: Alec Warner User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060719) 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> <45478D02.3060504@gentoo.org> <20061031180004.67381de6@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20061031180004.67381de6@snowdrop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8cb9bf5d-f7f5-4cec-831c-ca7c7ddd41bc X-Archives-Hash: b6f70f1c880483c504f1f0d21a8a3c85 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:50:58 +0100 Jakub Moc wrote: > | Stephen Bennett napsal(a): > | > On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:18:26 +0100 > | > Jakub Moc wrote: > | > > | >> 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 (Outdated ebuild A depends 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 on junky outdated ebuild B which depends on crappy, unsupported 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... ) > | > > | > 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 > > So if it's "ridden by tons of bugs", why did it ever get marked stable? > Sometimes bugs are discovered after a stable marking, such as security bugs. You of all people know how crappy some software developers are at releasing bug-free software. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list