From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-user+bounces-99316-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Mh7aA-0001PF-5t
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:57:58 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 32BEFE08EF
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 29 Aug 2009 01:07:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27DBAE0AD7
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:33:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDADE67A73
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:33:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Score: -3.206
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.206 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.607,
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 VSex8wRrMwDe for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>;
Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:33:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BAD767A60
for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:33:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50)
id 1Mg3dr-00071H-8E
for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:33:23 +0200
Received: from mn-69-34-67-62.sta.embarqhsd.net ([69.34.67.62])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:33:23 +0200
Received: from grant.b.edwards by mn-69-34-67-62.sta.embarqhsd.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-user@gentoo.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:33:23 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
From: Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com>
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Why does emerge want to downgrade firefox/xul-runner?
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:33:10 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <h71lam$hur$1@ger.gmane.org>
References: <h71jkb$crf$1@ger.gmane.org>
<58965d8a0908251419l312f1887xd16e6501cd05e87b@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: mn-69-34-67-62.sta.embarqhsd.net
User-Agent: slrn/pre0.9.9-102 (Linux)
Sender: news <news@ger.gmane.org>
X-Archives-Salt: 53534b89-ed15-4927-99c8-a9d50ba06f7e
X-Archives-Hash: ead4a4206b0c9d7dcc2d0883ee4ae39d
On 2009-08-25, Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Grant Edwards<grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Were firefox 3.5.2 and xulrunner 1.9.1.2 marked as stable last
>> week and then changed back to unstable this week?
>
> I think so, yes. If you read the Changelog file, it shows this:
>
> 21 Aug 2009; Christian Faulhammer <fauli@gentoo.org>
> mozilla-firefox-3.5.2-r1.ebuild:
> revert all stable keywords
>
> 20 Aug 2009; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org>
> mozilla-firefox-3.5.2-r1.ebuild:
> Stable for HPPA (bug #280393).
>
> 20 Aug 2009; Christian Faulhammer <fauli@gentoo.org>
> mozilla-firefox-3.5.2-r1.ebuild:
> stable x86, security bug 280393
I forgot about the ebuild changelog file -- I knew I should
have been able to figure this out somehow. It was the
afternoon/night of the 20th that they got upgraded. Heck, the
packages were probably back to unstable before the all of
builds finished.
For other packages I wouldn't care much, but flipping back and
forth between "semi-major" versions of firefox/xulrunner is
both fairly disruptive and takes hours and hours of build-time.
I guess I'll leave them as-is for a while. Firefox 3.5 is
noticably snappier, and downgrading them will take all evening.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! You were s'posed
at to laugh!
visi.com