[gentoo-dev] What's up with the binutils (arch unstable) downgrade?

[gentoo-dev] What's up with the binutils (arch unstable) downgrade?

[Duncan]

Emerge is asking me to downgrade binutils (I'm running unstable/~), and
I'm wondering what's up.

These entries from the changelog say what happened, but aren't very
helpful figuring out why.  

 24 Jul 2004; Travis Tilley <lv@gentoo.org>
 binutils-2.15.91.0.1-r1.ebuild: removing ~amd64 keyword

 08 Jul 2004; Travis Tilley <lv@gentoo.org>
 binutils-2.15.91.0.1-r1.ebuild: adding ~amd64 keyword for wider testing

In addition, I did a quick bugzilla search using "ALL binutils" and found
nothing mentioning that version and amd64.  Thus, I'm as in the dark as I
was before.

There's a couple reasons I'm asking.

1) Altho it's partly a BIOS setting I just tweaked, my system seems more
stable than it's been since I got it, in EITHER Gentoo or Mandrake.  It'd
be nice to /keep/ it that way, which means I'm a bit hesitant to touch
something that seems to be working fine.

2) I just a couple days ago emerged the new KDE 3.3.0_beta2, without
seeming issue, and it'd be nice to know if whatever is causing this
downgrade will affect that, security-wise or otherwise.

I've also just compiled and installed kernel 2.6.8-rc2, which again may
have something to do with the stability it seems I've got right now. 
Again, since binutils are used in that process, am I now running a faulty
kernel?

If the binutils seems to work, does that mean I'm in the clear?  Are there
just a few packages it has trouble with (which ones)?  What's up?

I've kept my now arch keywordless binutils, pending a bit more info.

One more line describing /why/ the testing failed, causing the keyword
revocation, would likely have been /incredibly/ helpful.  

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --
Benjamin Franklin



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] What's up with the binutils (arch unstable) downgrade?

[Travis Tilley]

On Monday 26 July 2004 05:53 am, Duncan wrote:
> I've kept my now arch keywordless binutils, pending a bit more info.
>
> One more line describing /why/ the testing failed, causing the keyword
> revocation, would likely have been /incredibly/ helpful.

it spews a frightening number of (non-fatal) warnings while compiling a kernel 
and i have one person who is getting a BFD internal error. I removed the 
~amd64 keyword more because i dont trust it and to be cautious than anything 
else. 2.15.90.0.1.1-r3 should be pretty solid on amd64, this is the version 
in stable (and now the latest version available to ~amd64 users). if you have 
any problems with it, please feel free to beat me with a stick till it's 
fixed. ;)

i do apologise for the less than helpful changelog entry.

-- 

Travis Tilley <lv@gentoo.org>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: What's up with the binutils (arch unstable) downgrade?

[Duncan]

Travis Tilley posted <200407260651.09949.lv@gentoo.org>, excerpted below, 
on Mon, 26 Jul 2004 06:51:09 -0400:

> On Monday 26 July 2004 05:53 am, Duncan wrote:
>> I've kept my now arch keywordless binutils, pending a bit more info.
>>
>> One more line describing /why/ the testing failed, causing the keyword
>> revocation, would likely have been /incredibly/ helpful.
> 
> it spews a frightening number of (non-fatal) warnings while compiling a
> kernel and i have one person who is getting a BFD internal error. I
> removed the ~amd64 keyword more because i dont trust it and to be cautious
> than anything else.

Thanks.  That's what I was looking for.

I /did/ see some rather "interesting" warnings, compiling perl (rev-dep
rebuild as suggested after a different update), in its test phase. 
Something about missing symbols for a couple of the tests.  However,
anybody that's running amd64 and actually watches the compiler output
should be used to various rather fearsome looking warnings scrolling by,
by now, and unless I have problems with the resulting binary or those
warnings turn to errors, I've learned to ignore most of them.  Nothing
unusual with the latest 2.6.8-rc2 kernel.org kernel, however. <shrug>

And, as I said, my system is more stable now than it has ever been, so I'm
not wanting to unnecessarily rock the boat! <g> (I've alway been less
stable that I expected, but part of it was memory timing issues, combined
with SMP and the still relatively new AMD64 arch.  Changed a BIOS setting
and haven't crashed yet, with the 2.6.8-rc2 kernel, tho I was still
experiencing occasional crashes on 2.7.0, both compiled with the in
question binutils. Hopin' to KEEP it uncrashed!)

(BTW, /thought/ I posted that to amd64, not devel, but oh, well.. <g>)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --
Benjamin Franklin



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list