Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1 , question on recompiling

[Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1715 bytes --]

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006 20:06:13 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:

> > Running testing, most packages wb recompiled within a month anyway.
> 
> I have a lot of "testing" packages, which run without problems.

That's different to running a completely testing system, the vast
majority of your packages are still stable and thus, by definition, won't
change very often.

> A lot of outstanding bugs seem to affect only a few special users.
> Yet again, Gentoo should make a 4th category by making "stable" =
> "server" & splitting "testing" into "newly unmasked" & "desktop-ready":
> many "testing" packages today are in fact desktop-ready,
> ie the remaining bugs will be rare & easy to recover from.

Remember that the distinction is not about bugs in the software but in
the ebuilds. I think the current system is fine with a choice of a low
maintenance system where working packages change rarely and one where you
have access to closer to the bleeding edge. If you want true bleeding
edge, you can always add packages to /etc/portage/package.mask. The
control /etc/portage gives you makes multiple levels of ARCH
unnecessary. You have already created your own set of "desktop-ready"
packages by customising package.keywords. Someone else may have
different requirements, let each user choose for themself.
 
> > I wanted to see if the 'kdehiddenvisibility' flag made any difference
> 
> What was your experience ?  Do you recommend others (me) to use it ?

I can't say I noticed a difference, but it mainly affects KDE startup
time and that's something I rarely do, and don't hang around to watch.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

No program done by a hacker will work unless he is on the system.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]