From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB8C138247 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:14:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D6A4E09C5; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:13:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vb0-f42.google.com (mail-vb0-f42.google.com [209.85.212.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 405C7E0919 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:13:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vb0-f42.google.com with SMTP id p14so1625802vbm.15 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 04:13:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=VUerIzlj/TlDuZtSl2woNV89uLZ2++/fGZZr6mmAscQ=; b=laKzyMcMgqN4uFbFWo4JW9LiDsGd2vGz0Y18YOBiEALxLsyPVlNxL9nRgx/vbgqKiY g1yTwRCKCMqUAvUnU2gx5Sl+TemHjLvxG98BEExzgpjAf5z/kFiChtxsFRFe5LiR5S/j Eb3+rJbLSzfqkzzLF8gDAmc68R9Z0Lw40DmW4x8I7hDJykoi6VP5mkt48uR4qNWgi2Fw pAXZ805Mg2NxxUcXcQ9EGO+jxIjJbVlnpUHj/H9Jcqg5mmYlF2iIa3iOfsEIeVlNsRs9 A9yX5Vn3ZUKU4gpnTsW81Ty9PZ4W4nRiCdM4i6SCp+TEU7C6psTyQ5Z+DWwJCWIvmeQs +NwA== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.221.47.193 with SMTP id ut1mr495805vcb.8.1384431230366; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 04:13:50 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.108.199 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 04:13:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5284BC18.5000702@gentoo.org> References: <20131113151012.04145837@gentoo.org> <5283948F.1000409@gentoo.org> <52841023.9010208@gentoo.org> <20131114061328.09136f6f@gentoo.org> <5284BC18.5000702@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 07:13:50 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: zRhO-LMpBmDHXZJpqgn1Dm9sBxo Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Cc: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 09b7147b-5d13-4dcc-9c12-abaac4d27997 X-Archives-Hash: e51ca9c653f1d8eddcf74bea7b43ea59 On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 7:03 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > > So just "fix it as problems appear and/or we have some spare time" ... Have any problems appeared that impact anybody who hasn't tried to take advantage of the new multilib features (ie modified their config files/etc)? > > Well, you accidentally cut out all references to TommyD's work again. > Almost as if you don't even want to discuss a working proper solution > that just doesn't have the ego hammering it in ... We get it - there are two competing approaches to multilib... That's perfectly fine - we can sort out which one works better once they both work. It would be more of a concern if maintainers were being asked to maintain things twice, but as far as I'm aware the developers of each of the competing approaches have been doing most of the work themselves. Of course, there could be issues I simply haven't heard of. > There's this thing called overlay ;) > Once you have everything prepared commit it all masked. > A few days later if there's no obvious bug reports unmask it and duck. I'm not sure an overlay is a good solution for a tree-wide change that will take months to roll out. It is great for testing the core features with a small testing group, but the implementation is always going to have to hit the whole tree and all its consumers with little formal testing at that scale. I guess my main question is what exactly is broken? I haven't heard of any large-scale problems with the new multilib rollout. I'm sure if I went looking for bugs I'd find them, but that's pretty much par-for-the-course for Gentoo. If I go install the latest gcc the day after it gets added to the tree and enable some new flag that was just introduced I'm going to find lots of packages that break. That doesn't mean that the new GCC wasn't ready for the tree - just that I went looking for trouble, found it, and now I have the opportunity to help out by filing bugs if what I actually did was reasonable. Rich