From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j41CWNkD002698 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 12:32:23 GMT Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DSDcb-0001s6-00 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 12:32:29 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1DSDWU-0005lp-Uy for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 01 May 2005 14:26:10 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-66-193.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.66.193]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 May 2005 14:26:10 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-66-193.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 May 2005 14:26:10 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Cutting down on non-cascaded profiles Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 05:31:48 -0700 Organization: Sometimes Message-ID: References: <4274ACD1.9020003@gentoo.org> <4274B10C.5060507@longlandclan.hopto.org> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-66-193.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 58c09b6c-e3f5-47e5-bde8-5258f6754a3b X-Archives-Hash: 1a1bf54039b9f8c62728deef5247ea19 Stuart Longland posted <4274B10C.5060507@longlandclan.hopto.org>, excerpted below, on Sun, 01 May 2005 20:35:56 +1000: > Donnie Berkholz wrote: >> How long are all those non-cascaded profiles going to stick around? They >> make profile changes a mess for anyone who wants to do something crazy >> like change default USE flags for everyone. (Who would ever need to do >> that?!?!) > > I was just thinking this myself. Are there any users still using Gentoo > Linux 1.4 or 2004.0? I know the default-amd64-2004.2/deprecated file says it's subject to removal after 2005.07.01. I don't remember the date of the last time this discussion came up (tho I do remember someone posted a nice dependency map of what profiles depended on what, nice graphic that was!), but I believe the deprecated files appeared in several of those legacy "flat" profiles as a result thereof. Of course, note that the amd64 arch tends to be a bit more forward leaning than others, including x86, with its larger user base including a decent segment of conservative "enterprise", or as I'd personally opine, "legacy", users, so 2004.2 for amd64 probably roughly equates to 2004.0 for x86. I really can't imagine anyone still on 1.4 that'd be attracted to Gentoo in the first place, but I'm sure in the large x86 base at least, there are likely to be some. Assuming the amd64 profile above was deprecated at about the same time as the others, July 1st should be a good time to remove them all. For those without a specific deadline date in them (I checked the mentioned cobalt-mips-2004.1, no date there), but that have been deprecated for some time, sticking the July 1st date notice in them would be a useful thing to do, for any that might still be using them. That still gives them ~60 days notice, plus what they had b4 the date was put in. Of course, should there be dates in any deprecated files already there, with said dates passed, shoot 'em now and get 'em out of their misery! I run amd64, so maybe I'm partial, but I certainly like the set date thing. IMO all archs should have a profile deprecation time policy, and stick dates in their deprecated files as appropriate. IIRC for amd64, it's something like 6 or 8 months from the first appearance of the deprecated file, which is then post-dated appropriately, save for "development" profiles, which usually come with a short deprecation time warning (six weeks notice I believe I saw in one) in them from the beginning. However, anyone bleeding edge enough to be using "development" profiles should in practice have moved on to the /next/ profile, usually the following official release, long before the deprecation notice appears, anyway. I know that's always been the case here. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list