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 ) id 1OvFr7-00023n-2k for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:42:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A00EE07E2; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A23E07E2 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:41:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F05071B4131 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:41:45 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.908 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.309, 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 OMWKvhLlMQGc for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:41:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7657B1B4162 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:41:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OvFqB-0007lB-4k for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:41:27 +0200 Received: from athedsl-376571.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.22.249]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:41:27 +0200 Received: from realnc by athedsl-376571.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:41:27 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: what's going on with updates ? Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 23:41:39 +0300 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <20100913183723.57A77E0746@pigeon.gentoo.org> <201009132045.16523.joost@antarean.org> <201009132113.48484.joost@antarean.org> 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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-376571.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100908 Thunderbird/3.1.3 In-Reply-To: <201009132113.48484.joost@antarean.org> X-Archives-Salt: ced27f96-1e13-4c0f-85be-cb6ac86f60d8 X-Archives-Hash: 102912a776816bdb3c51bdc262361230 On 09/13/2010 10:13 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: > On Monday 13 September 2010 21:00:42 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >> On 09/13/2010 09:45 PM, J. Roeleveld wrote: >>>> [...] >>> >>> I wouldn't expect people to run a Gentoo system with all packages on >>> unstable. I tend to only select specific packages as unstable when I >>> really need that version. >> >> Usually the best "stability" is reached by running either full stable or >> full testing (aka "unstable"). Mixing usually makes things worse. I >> used to run a mixed system, but at some point it was clear to me that >> this fscks things up quite often due to package versions whether ~arch >> packages breaking with arch ones. > > This is true, but not all packages I want are in stable, this forces me to > unmask these. > I also don't always want to wait for packages to become stable. > > What I currently have in "/etc/portage/package.keywords is: > =games-strategy/x2-1.4.05 ~amd64 > =games-strategy/x3-2.5.01 ~amd64 > =app-emulation/virtualbox-bin-3.2.8 ~amd64 > =app-emulation/virtualbox-modules-3.2.8 ~amd64 > > These don't have a large set of additional requirements. If they did, I > wouldn't have upgraded to these. I also had "qt-creator" in there, but that > one has become stable since. > > I'm still not clear how versions can be made to be marked "stable". After they go into testing and stay there for a month or two, someone makes a request to put it into stable. AFAIK, this request can also be automated. The person putting it into stable is then required to sanity check the package whether it can work with the rest of stable packages, since they differ from the testing ones. And that step is what makes a fully ~arch system more reliable then a mixed one; because the package is known to work in an ~arch system, but it's not known whether it works OK in a stable one. It's also a reason why many devs don't accept bug reports if you're using an ~arch package in a stable system; it's just too random and problems are expected. With Gentoo, a stable system is supposed to work (obviously). An ~arch system is also supposed to work (note that "testing" doesn't mean "broken"; I try to avoid the term "unstable" when I refer to ~arch, "testing" is the term that accurately describes what ~arch is.) But a mixed system is not supposed to work ("not supposed" meaning no one is trying to make it work or even testing it.)