Re: baselayout was Re: [gentoo-server] Stable portage tree

[Jonas Fietz <info@jonasfietz.de>]

Hi

> are a pain.  I had to reboot a system that hadn't been booted in
> about a year and the modules didn't load because of the changes to
> modules.autoload.  I've had to clean up Apache conf files 'cause they
> moved.  I've had to deal with moving to the new "modular" xorg (and
> try to hunt down all the X tools I used to have).  Not to mention
> the baselayout changes...
Well, Xorg was an upstream decision, the config-files for apache where 
simply wrong before, so that had to be fixed, and about the changes in 
modules.autoload, i am not so sure.
But to the people needing a stable portage tree: It is really a totally 
different ideology which is somewhat diametral to what gentoo does. 
Gentoo does _not_ have real releases, which some people, me included, 
think is a good thing. Also, i think if the security-fixes are just 
backported, I personally believe that unless there are many people 
helping with the effort there will be more bugs introduced by this, as 
most of the time the codes might not know the code base as well.
Also, you are complaining about the long list of updates when doing a -u 
somewhat. Those are _real_ dependencies, even if they were just imagined 
by some hallucinating gentoo dev ;). So normally there would not be a 
way around installing them.
But on an infrastructure as big as some are talking about here, there 
usually are few types of servers, so that it can be tested anyway. And 
maybe, those types of companies should be more willing to spend a few 
bucks to the gentoo project, maybe about the new "adopt a gentoo-dev"-page.

Ok, ranted enough ;)

Jonas Fietz


DISCLAIMER: I AM NOT A GENTOO DEV
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list