From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NPvWi-0004um-Ev for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:11:36 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6975CE0477; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:11:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (ey-out-1920.google.com [74.125.78.146]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D920E065A for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 10:11:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 3so2520436eyh.40 for ; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 02:11:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=d1t6YicMh5fmuj/liQI15vRkfNhTY+cnERaLWBihIgc=; b=PQtrxzjHlt2zc29NU6bvEdfgf1MzFC1fhvBkI4h/DlmIXll9MM7XUXlZZW//WgHpy9 bpV0TrU+O02Yl13WCITQ75YAx/ehHkKAdkf4IgZ/jQyQn5ei9m3M1MHKRnEfFHwDZScp NqBBKMBf9M6+7o2ELe6WQyCC2qlnsWo8y5ffI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=w+rETN1wXMOIAHs/jnEhK0Fo4vVnvtPdJ0SXsjvMCJMUpgdiRlah4p9Qe9DeVa3vGS 25+4EpSXq/u96ywsIorFBhw+yizjU3evf63ImuxA0u/EZOUUsIQ9viWfq+ZfAOdSjkzh k8np1PThrFotLhPIclZUOcGft5LSkcYaHskdk= 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 Received: by 10.216.85.147 with SMTP id u19mr6043478wee.88.1262167862274; Wed, 30 Dec 2009 02:11:02 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 05:11:02 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: [gentoo-dev] Why do packages which will not build remain in the distribution list? From: Robert Bradbury To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d7856413e9fe047bef5bde X-Archives-Salt: 09bcf372-5540-46e4-8744-3a5707d92246 X-Archives-Hash: 8032505451bf594008c5078b05ad53d7 --0016e6d7856413e9fe047bef5bde Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 For the last week or so, there have been packages in the "world" distribution list which previously installed fine which currently do not, these include ruby-gdkpixbuf2, ruby-pango, ruby-gtk2, ruby-gnomecanvas2, ruby-gnome2 and ruby-libglade2 (this is on an x86 system). My reading of the bug reports suggest that this is a problem with the ruby/gentoo config scripts. If so, ok fine, then pull them from the "world" distribution until such scripts/ebuilds/patches are available. Please do not leave them in the world distribution list when they are known to be defective. It appears that there may be some oversight/direction lacking with respect to what makes up the QA with respect to distributed (e.g. "approved") packages which have known problems. For people who attempt to update their systems on a nightly basis and provide feedback to the Gentoo developers, this can be an annoying situation (it may require the expansion/contraction of scripts which enable/disable nightly builds). I understand if there is a problem with the upstream source which may take months to fix for the bug reports to percolate up and solutions to percolate down, but in the mean time end users should not be subjected to packages known to be problematic (and thus the packages should be pulled from the world distribution list). Robert --0016e6d7856413e9fe047bef5bde Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable For the last week or so, there have been packages in the "world" = distribution list which previously installed fine which currently do not, t= hese include ruby-gdkpixbuf2, ruby-pango, ruby-gtk2, ruby-gnomecanvas2, rub= y-gnome2 and ruby-libglade2 (this is on an x86 system). =A0My reading of th= e bug reports suggest that this is a problem with the ruby/gentoo config sc= ripts. =A0If so, ok fine, then pull them from the "world" distrib= ution until such scripts/ebuilds/patches are available. =A0Please do not le= ave them in the world distribution list when they are known to be defective= . =A0It appears that there may be some oversight/direction lacking with res= pect to what makes up the QA with respect to distributed (e.g. "approv= ed") packages which have known problems.

For people who attempt to update their systems on a nightly = basis and provide feedback to the Gentoo developers, this can be an annoyin= g situation (it may require the expansion/contraction of scripts which enab= le/disable nightly builds).

I understand if there is a problem with the upstream so= urce which may take months to fix for the bug reports to percolate up and s= olutions to percolate down, but in the mean time end users should not be su= bjected to packages known to be problematic (and thus the packages should b= e pulled from the world distribution list).

Robert

--0016e6d7856413e9fe047bef5bde--