From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LYwnH-0003fi-Gm for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4B45E022B; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 832F7E022B for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19E62B4F72 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.968 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.968 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.631, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A2Id42EF6rqQ for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D354565837 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LYwn2-000657-QA for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:12 +0000 Received: from ip68-230-99-190.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.99.190]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:12 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-99-190.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:12 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: media-video/gephex Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:17:04 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20090215212907.00a735b9@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-99-190.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: d2006989-28a8-4e36-a98c-e1916795901a X-Archives-Hash: 387ebf7522d67d8729d5138949dd4f29 Peter Alfredsen posted 20090215212907.00a735b9@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Sun, 15 Feb 2009 21:29:07 +0100: > +# Peter Alfredsen (15 Feb 2009)=20 > +# Masking for removal in 30 days. > +# Fails to build with gcc-4.3, bug 250712 > +media-video/gephex > + Shouldn't there be a bit more to it than that, something about it being=20 maintainer-needed, or maintainer unwilling to work on it further, or=20 upstream dead, or some combination of the above? Just because it doesn't= =20 compile with the latest GCC isn't normally considered reason in itself to= =20 remove a package. Also note that there's a "new" (April, 2007) version 0.4.4, on the site,=20 that may work better with newer gcc than the 2005 version 0.4.3 that's=20 the latest in our tree. So maybe it well could be maintainer-needed, but= =20 that should be in the masking for removal reason, if so, and ideally,=20 listed in the last rites announcement here, in case anyone's interested=20 in taking a look at it. That said, I don't have any particular interest in it, so I don't have a=20 problem with it disappearing. I just found the ONLY reason given an=20 uncommon enough reason for removal on its own that it warranted comment,=20 is all. --=20 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