From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JBCkR-0007M7-8X for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 17:23:51 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id m05HMS5U018404; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 17:22:28 GMT Received: from smtp-out3.libero.it (smtp-out3.libero.it [212.52.84.43]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id m05HJHT6013666 for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 17:19:17 GMT Received: from mailrelay07.libero.it (192.168.32.94) by smtp-out3.libero.it (7.3.120) id 4628C87A01E014FD for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 18:19:17 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAAFlLf0eXOQo6/2dsb2JhbAAIqXg Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.0.6]) ([151.57.10.58]) by OutRelay-b07.libero.it with ESMTP; 05 Jan 2008 18:19:17 +0100 Message-ID: <477FBC0E.2090906@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 18:19:10 +0100 From: Luca Barbato User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071127) 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] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January References: <20080101103002.083C4652C4@smtp.gentoo.org> <54551.192.168.2.159.1199365359.squirrel@www.aei-tech.com> <477D75CA.1030003@gentoo.org> <20080104000155.23e056b4@snowcone> <20080104004653.039f488e@snowcone> <20080104012750.63f4f23a@snowcone> <63044.68.54.223.178.1199445791.squirrel@www.aei-tech.com> <20080104210213.50a99e6b@snowcone> <1199506450.7609.23.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> In-Reply-To: <1199506450.7609.23.camel@inertia.twi-31o2.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 12dc1428-4c0d-4861-834c-af3c3180522c X-Archives-Hash: 41affa64163c89651104d2fe5aa323f1 Chris Gianelloni wrote: > This has been an issue for quite some time. Of course, the impact is > debatable, but it seems that we cannot agree ourselves on what is > agreeable, so I see this as a point to bring to the Council simply so it > can be resolved "once and for all" and things can resume normal > operation. This thread so far spawned lots of reply from an external contributor making the point of keeping stale ebuilds around and 4 developers against the idea proposing different solutions ranging from force update pending some remote testing to remove the stable keyword for such arches. Anything other suggestions? lu PS: has anybody checked how viable is now qemu-system ? -- Luca Barbato Gentoo Council Member Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list