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 <gentoo-user+bounces-42396-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@gentoo.org>)
id 1FkFkA-0000FK-3h
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 28 May 2006 07:31:22 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4S7Tr69024627;
Sun, 28 May 2006 07:29:53 GMT
Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.235])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4S7PGHA022555
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 28 May 2006 07:25:17 GMT
Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 70so313391wra
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 28 May 2006 00:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth;
b=J1QanJhx01DP3tklvIHHlW5AoKCbckSZWsB6bzPuy9MzoEF84WusNuNMxDwRzQ87p8qqc11AIes64gUg+rxwEGFTG+kaatctJmpfZmXRahkYdYT5PnSTY3Kt6n9xHMck26u0fdSsLQZv+ZDyuahQ7qg0kPpfN3hk+C4sQAiZrLc=
Received: by 10.54.117.8 with SMTP id p8mr1009139wrc;
Sun, 28 May 2006 00:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.54.126.18 with HTTP; Sun, 28 May 2006 00:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <7573e9640605280025j6b0461fbwd3acff14f063dcba@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 May 2006 00:25:16 -0700
From: "Richard Fish" <bigfish@asmallpond.org>
Sender: richard.j.fish@gmail.com
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Upgrading to gcc 4.1: emerge -e world required?
In-Reply-To: <44793AD1.5070906@mid.email-server.info>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <4476B250.7040107@mid.email-server.info>
<200605272052.33386.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de>
<4478A99A.9040903@mid.email-server.info>
<200605272238.00309.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de>
<44793AD1.5070906@mid.email-server.info>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 92ed39dfa9668e13
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by robin.gentoo.org id k4S7PGHA022555
X-Archives-Salt: 882e42cc-8518-4db2-bd4a-64603ba9b72b
X-Archives-Hash: ffd96be4f279ae29e8090b1d56dbc053
On 5/27/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
> >>>if he does not have glib?
> >
> >>Then he installs it.
> >
> > so, he should install something he does not need and 'test' it, to satisfy
> > your needs?
>
> Not MY needs, no. But to be able to say that all is fine, when it has been
> posted here, that glib is one of the culprits.
No, this wasn't my point at all. I am *not* arguing that "all is
fine". (However I still don't see how you figure that a bug report
that shows the exact same problem occurring with both gcc 3.4.6 and
4.1.1 indicates a problem with 4.1.1)
My point is that it is wrong to flame the devs about a problem with a
~arch package. Regardless of any documentation, GWN entries, or
anything else anybody wrote, the very fact that gcc 4.1 is in ~arch
means it needed wider testing. Here is what the handbook says about
the testing branch:
<quote> (http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=3)
The testing branch is exactly what it says - Testing. If a package is
in testing, it means that the developers feel that it is functional
but has not been thoroughly tested. You could very well be the first
to discover a bug in the package in which case you could file a
bugreport to let the developers know about it.
Beware though, you might notice stability issues, imperfect package
handling (for instance wrong/missing dependencies), too frequent
updates (resulting in lots of building) or broken packages.
</quote>
You complained about a "complete lack of QA", and it seemed quite
obvious you were not referring to just the gcc upgrade. Well guess
what...~arch users _are_ the QA department! If you are not willing to
try out things that the developers *think* will work, without flaming
them when you encounter a problem that slipped by, you have no
business running ~arch.
This whole topic of "this-or-that worked fine for me" was a mistake on
my part. I was trying to make another point which was that the
statement claiming "the upgrade should be incredibly easy..." could
have been perfectly reasonable to make. Unfortunately it has been
more of a distraction than anything else.
-Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list