From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GaIzq-0002Ag-Kr for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:30:43 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k9ILSZ0E022541; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:28:35 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k9ILQUeY020804 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:26:30 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E375642CA for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:26:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.57 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.57 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.029, BAYES_00=-2.599] 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 vD+MnOlMgECP for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:26:27 +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 EFB8164822 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:26:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GaIvS-0007Tu-Dl for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:26:10 +0200 Received: from mue-88-130-112-016.dsl.tropolys.de ([88.130.112.16]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:26:10 +0200 Received: from listen by mue-88-130-112-016.dsl.tropolys.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:26:10 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Alexander Skwar Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Re: Re: how thorough is #emerge --sync? Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:27:24 +0200 Organization: =?UTF-8?B?LsK3Lg==?= Message-ID: <2711704.NkvbxMYbyZ@m-id.message-center.info> References: <20061018033704.56943.qmail@web31713.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200610172253.27152.bulliver@badcomputer.org> <15910968.RmOYfFVDSC@work.message-center.info> <200610181130.40432.bulliver@badcomputer.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: mue-88-130-112-016.dsl.tropolys.de User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id k9ILSZ0g022541 X-Archives-Salt: ada6a915-8181-4fe0-94f4-1637e84cf312 X-Archives-Hash: 209166c43eaf3a573c810baba4d332c6 =C2=B7 Darren Kirby : > Quoth the Alexander Skwar >> Darren Kirby : >> > Quoth the Alexander Skwar >> > >> >> =C2=B7 maxim wexler : >> >> >>digg2ogg >> >> > >> >> > should be dir2ogg >> >> >> >> 0.8 is the latest stable version. Why do you think, that a differen= t >> >> version should be offered, when you "emerge dir2ogg"? >> > >> > Well, I'm the upstream author, and _I_ think there should be differe= nt >> > (ie: newer) version offered. Good enough? >> >> No, not good enough, as that doesn't matter at all. All that matters i= s, >> what's in the tree. And the latest stable version is 0.8, no matter wh= at >> you think. The question remains: Why should a different version be off= ered? >> >> Alexander Skwar >> -- >> A closed mouth gathers no foot. >=20 > Sorry Alexander, I just don't get where you're going with this. Version= 0.8 =20 > was released September 27, 2004! There have been 4 major new releases s= ince=20 > then, which include many bug fixes, and new and improved features. 0.8 = is old=20 > and busted, 0.9.3 is the new hotness! Who cares? All that matters to portage is, what's in the tree. > Surely I don't need to explain the concept of how software improves wit= h new=20 > development? You're not using GCC 2.95 and kernel 2.2.10 are you? No, because gcc 2.95 isn't the latest stable version in the tree. Alexander Skwar --=20 The way I understand it, the Russians are sort of a combination of evil a= nd incompetence... sort of like the Post Office with tanks. -- Emo Philips --=20 gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list