From: »Q« <boxcars@gmx.net>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: udev-191 bit me. Insufficient ptys
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2013 13:08:31 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130203130831.44766604@fuchsia.remarqs.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20130203185145.4008d87f@weird.wonkology.org
On Sun, 3 Feb 2013 18:51:45 +0100
Alex Schuster <wonko@wonkology.org> wrote:
> Alan McKinnon writes:
> > - news item
>
> There is one, from 2013-01-23, ending with 'Apologies if this news
> came too late for you.'
>
> Okay, if that one came a little earlier, I would have been fine.
I would have too. IMO, given the difficulties of putting in automagic
checks and/or failures that would work for everyone, news items are the
best way to handle info like this.
I'm a bit concerned that there wasn't one earlier for udev-197-r*.
AFAICT from the changelog, udev-197.ebuild hit the tree on 9 January,
and the stabilization bug* for a later revision was filed on 16
January. The stabilization request makes it clear devs should not
rush and should report any further issues they run across, yet
udev-197-r3 was stabilized just a few days later, at which point stable
users started hitting the issues.
I'm not clear on why udev-197-r* needed stabilization without having
~arch keywords for a period. I rely on the kindness of ~arch testers
who are willing to encounter the issues I later read about in a news
item before an ebuild is stabilized.
* https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=452556
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-03 19:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-31 3:35 [gentoo-user] udev-191 bit me. Insufficient ptys Michael Mol
2013-01-31 4:45 ` Canek Peláez Valdés
2013-01-31 4:48 ` Canek Peláez Valdés
2013-01-31 13:26 ` Michael Mol
2013-01-31 13:47 ` Michael Mol
2013-01-31 14:05 ` Michael Mol
2013-01-31 14:30 ` Peter Humphrey
2013-01-31 14:37 ` Michael Mol
2013-01-31 18:24 ` Mick
2013-01-31 18:29 ` Michael Mol
2013-01-31 14:31 ` Michael Mol
2013-01-31 14:45 ` Peter Humphrey
2013-01-31 15:23 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-01-31 15:26 ` Michael Mol
2013-02-02 15:21 ` Alex Schuster
2013-02-02 19:17 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-02-02 20:31 ` Neil Bothwick
2013-02-02 20:47 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-02-02 20:53 ` Bruce Hill
2013-02-03 11:24 ` Neil Bothwick
2013-02-03 12:02 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-02-03 14:54 ` Neil Bothwick
2013-02-03 17:24 ` Alan McKinnon
2013-02-03 19:08 ` Neil Bothwick
2013-02-03 19:23 ` Michael Orlitzky
2013-02-02 21:06 ` Michael Mol
2013-02-03 17:51 ` Alex Schuster
2013-02-03 19:08 ` »Q« [this message]
2013-02-07 17:40 ` Tanstaafl
2013-02-07 17:53 ` Peter Humphrey
2013-02-07 20:53 ` Tanstaafl
2013-02-07 21:25 ` Paul Hartman
2013-02-07 21:37 ` Tanstaafl
2013-02-07 22:00 ` Alecks Gates
2013-02-07 22:12 ` [gentoo-user] " »Q«
2013-02-08 7:29 ` [gentoo-user] " Alan McKinnon
2013-02-08 16:02 ` Paul Hartman
2013-02-08 20:17 ` Peter Humphrey
2013-02-11 1:40 ` Stroller
2013-02-07 21:38 ` Canek Peláez Valdés
2013-02-11 15:38 ` Stefan G. Weichinger
2013-02-11 16:14 ` Mick
2013-02-11 17:36 ` Dale
2013-02-11 19:41 ` Stefan G. Weichinger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130203130831.44766604@fuchsia.remarqs.net \
--to=boxcars@gmx.net \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox