From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6F6D138334 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 08:17:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DFBEFE0864; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 08:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32636E083D for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 08:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.83.178] (helo=mail.digimed.co.uk) by smarthost03d.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1huuex-0007C8-VB for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Aug 2019 08:17:32 +0000 Received: from phoucgh.digimed.co.uk (phoucgh.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.9]) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 81BF8642A0 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:17:31 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:17:31 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: acct-group packages ?? Message-ID: <20190806091731.6998e0d1@phoucgh.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4cfff72b-8b62-f3e3-1414-def00f873d28@gentoo.org> References: <20190803163014.vle7ytoalkenuykj@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <20190803182155.43d4385c@digimed.co.uk> <20190804165906.obfc5xhi4nmere25@matica.foolinux.mooo.com> <20190805082110.5769e1ac@digimed.co.uk> <4cfff72b-8b62-f3e3-1414-def00f873d28@gentoo.org> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/Do8Kn1Bb7=HL7o/QqHZ7ejD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 X-Originating-smarthost03d-IP: [82.69.83.178] Feedback-ID: 82.69.83.178 X-Archives-Salt: 9447f392-0cf2-4414-938b-b6483bafeeac X-Archives-Hash: 4e5d04d3c6f0233960a51b550115b6b4 --Sig_/Do8Kn1Bb7=HL7o/QqHZ7ejD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 09:17:17 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > I've not checked lately, but policy was that if an ebuild change did > > not result in differences in the installed files, there was no need > > for a version bump. This avoids needless recompiling of packages. > > =20 >=20 > Realistically, almost all ebuild changes should incur a new revision. I > would much rather recompile 100 packages *and have it work* than compile > 10 packages and have it crash three times requiring manual intervention > because the tree is so screwed up. >=20 > We have better guidelines these days: >=20 > https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions >=20 > but they still give developers too much freedom to be lazy and commit > important changes without a revision. The "straight to stable" advice > contradicts our existing stabilization policy, and the USE flag advice > says that you can rely on a non-default, portage-only feature to prevent > breakage. That's pretty much how I remember it. If the existing version crash, then the binaries have changed so it should be bumped, but if a dev missed out a new DEPEND for chromium of libreoffice that I happen to have already installed, I don't want to have to waste hours of CPU time recompiling to exactly the same end point. The most important statement in the policy is also the hardest to enforce "Developers are encouraged to use common sense" :-O --=20 Neil Bothwick What is a "free" gift ? Aren't all gifts free? --Sig_/Do8Kn1Bb7=HL7o/QqHZ7ejD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEGfLZTV7dXdQXh/dDdCdyyQfftocFAl1JN5sACgkQdCdyyQff toeiMQ//VpYFBblbjDmJwgPBkIJ2hZUtfsvG1zg/gMYKHEpypNBJoN3JenURNlzT 1TUpd2otk6pw1dhb5vKEBVagjBmOq9V0IRrPwq7hdBMvkfTAsKKEAHVRrxTsqxnF seGkPbge7dJOJtp7MXrhkO8x7lpqRztmaacSGHuIZOPogyQUa0MsyY/I54uXnbiG Ndf/w5sfigCpbTVlPLYHDTwAUYFEJyl/dcGdsmsd5WkXqvsg65ahszjXVdvJsxC0 t6tM7Ih58fQeBh2AvKuAyqv54nuX+8bq/OkczxuCn73X6BUCQSBfccCtr35uiptP nlfdL07bpLsPXcqOZMzGfg/lwEGuCsWd8DVYTTp0CCDp77kAfITssyVGkef4D0ev ktXg7fmTHwk7Ijv+aHzbit+vPwkqyNCsvQYOf2nvnHa6dW9VncFPoVmjjeJKLi+1 zF7wxjU7EiWO3hp1quu8uLUFTsJOOwHub9/dRvfIj70H0pLQvmkg3yahZElu9Dts hrjNEi8whnmVFEPhQAwDM0IcBoHZOXiqy9BrcDMOuAZRvfuOkLUmLy69I4pKneX7 8dLhOoXdvTYw0EmquYp5b76jgQkkpj+PDpXh5me5ckI5/DEFYEBsPzzCPuhXrZYU AMIxNAwFLk201uszhIA9Nrwy6UVqd8/kkISEGrQTJ7tKKfXUakw= =vFSL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/Do8Kn1Bb7=HL7o/QqHZ7ejD--