Bugzilla Bug 144084

Updated ebuild found on http://kuroo.org/kuroo/browser/ebuilds.
Also, please mark it as stable for amd64.

This one?

*kuroo-0.80.2 (13 May 2006)

  13 May 2006; Carsten Lohrke <carlo@gentoo.org> +kuroo-0.80.2.ebuild:
  Version bump.


>Also, please mark it as stable for amd64.

When an ebuild enters the tree we have a minimum period of ~30 days without
major bugs, before it is allowed to go stable. While this is given, I'm unsure
about it, since I don't use it and Portage frontends could cause severe system
breakage.


Karim, do you have any negative feedback on this version? How much feedback do
you have at all?

Hum, for the breakage risk... at least on x86 seems safe here,
even if I use it more to mantain/unmerge packages than to update them.

However 80.3 should be not far away, I translated it the 20 of july,
according to my mail should be released on August-September.

If you want a stabilization, just ask for it, however as carlo said, 30-day
rule.

Do you want -r1?  If it is a dependency fix it should go ok, I tested it anyway

1) emerges fine
2) passes collision test
3) works under KDE and Gnome (and this program is pretty cool)

Portage 2.1-r2 (default-linux/x86/2006.0, gcc-3.4.6, glibc-2.3.6-r4,
2.6.17-gentoo-r4 i686)
=================================================================
System uname: 2.6.17-gentoo-r4 i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 2500+
Gentoo Base System version 1.12.4
app-admin/eselect-compiler: [Not Present]
dev-lang/python:     2.4.3-r1
dev-python/pycrypto: 2.0.1-r5
dev-util/ccache:     [Not Present]
dev-util/confcache:  [Not Present]
sys-apps/sandbox:    1.2.17
sys-devel/autoconf:  2.13, 2.59-r7
sys-devel/automake:  1.4_p6, 1.5, 1.6.3, 1.7.9-r1, 1.8.5-r3, 1.9.6-r2
sys-devel/binutils:  2.16.1-r3
sys-devel/gcc-config: 1.3.13-r3
sys-devel/libtool:   1.5.22
virtual/os-headers:  2.6.11-r2
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="x86"
AUTOCLEAN="yes"
CBUILD="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-O2"
CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /usr/share/X11/xkb"
CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/env.d /etc/gconf /etc/revdep-rebuild /etc/splash
/etc/terminfo"
CXXFLAGS="-O2"
DISTDIR="/usr/portage/distfiles"
FEATURES="autoconfig ccache collision-protect distlocks metadata-transfer
parallel-fetch sandbox sfperms strict test"
GENTOO_MIRRORS="ftp://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/pub/Linux/gentoo/"
LANG="de_DE@euro"
LC_ALL="de_DE@euro"
LINGUAS="de"
MAKEOPTS="-j2"
PKGDIR="/usr/portage/packages"
PORTAGE_RSYNC_OPTS="--recursive --links --safe-links --perms --times --compress
--force --whole-file --delete --delete-after --stats --timeout=180
--exclude='/distfiles' --exclude='/local' --exclude='/packages'"
PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/var/tmp"
PORTDIR="/usr/portage"
PORTDIR_OVERLAY="/usr/local/portage"
SYNC="rsync://rsync.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/gentoo-portage"
USE="x86 3dnow 3dnowext X Xaw3d a52 alsa arts artworkextra asf audiofile avi
bash-completion beagle berkdb bidi bitmap-fonts bootsplash branding bzip2 cairo
cdda cddb cdparanoia cdr cli cracklib crypt css cups curl custom-cflags dbus
dga directfb divx4linux dlloader dri dts dvd dvdr dvdread dvi eds emacs emboss
encode esd evo exif expat fam fat fbcon ffmpeg firefox foomaticdb fortran ftp
gb gcj gdbm gif gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 gtkhtml hal icq idn imagemagick
imap imlib ipv6 isdnlog java javascript jikes jpeg jpeg2k ldap leim libg++
libwww lm_sensors mad maildir matroska mbox mikmod mime mmx mmxext mng mono
motif mp3 mpeg mpeg2 mule nautilus ncurses nforce2 nls nocardbus nptl nptlonly
nsplugin nvidia objc ogg opengl pam pcre pdf pdflib perl plotutils pmu png ppds
pppd preview-latex print python qt3 qt4 quicktime readline reflection reiserfs
samba sdk session slang spell spl sse ssl svg svga t1lib tcltk tcpd test theora
thunderbird tiff truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts udev usb vcd videos vorbis
win32codecs wmf wxwindows xine xml xorg xosd xv xvid zlib elibc_glibc
input_devices_mouse input_devices_keyboard kernel_linux linguas_de userland_GNU
video_cards_radeon video_cards_vesa video_cards_fbdev"
Unset:  CTARGET, EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS, INSTALL_MASK, LDFLAGS,
PORTAGE_RSYNC_EXTRA_OPTS

(In reply to comment #4)
> Do you want -r1?

Yes. If you choose to stabilize, use this one, please.

kuroo-0.80.2 etc-update functionality went broke with portage-2.1 upgrade.
0.80.3 will fix that.
Apart from that kuroo seems to do just fine.

With portage 2.1 in stable, do maintainers still want kuroo ~0.88.2 to go
stable?

(In reply to comment #7)
> With portage 2.1 in stable, do maintainers still want kuroo ~0.80.2 to go
> stable?
> 

Maybe kuroo-0.80.2 could be stable on portage-2.0.* but not for 2.1*.

(In reply to comment #7)
> With portage 2.1 in stable, do maintainers still want kuroo ~0.88.2 to go
> stable?

Functionality missing/broken, so I'd say no, un'ccing arch herds for now.

(In reply to comment #8)
> Maybe kuroo-0.80.2 could be stable on portage-2.0.* but not for 2.1*.

There is only stable. Not stable X and stable Y. Portage won't be slotted. And
everyone should run 2.1. The only reason the 2.0 version is still in the tree
is, that systems not having been updated for several months, can't directly
update to Portage 2.1.


Portage team: Could you comment on this? From my point of view Portage
frontends should check a variable to find out, if they're compatible with a
particular version. Does EAPI encompass cmd/parameter compatibility? Currently
EAPI is set to zero. Does this mean Portage 2.1 or does the value zero still
mean legacy Portage crap? Are there connections to frontend developers to
ensure they have the necessary information to have compatible versions of their
frontends ready, a while before a particular Portage (major) version goes
stable?

EAPI is concerned with ebuilds <-> portage compatibility, not frontends.

(In reply to comment #6)
> kuroo-0.80.2 etc-update functionality went broke with portage-2.1 upgrade.
> 0.80.3 will fix that.

AFAIK, portage-2.1 handles config file updates in essentially the same way as
previous versions, so I have no idea what incompatibility kuroo is
experiencing.  Anyway, anyone using less than portage-2.1 should upgrade as
soon as possible.  There's no good reason to continue using an older version.

(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > With portage 2.1 in stable, do maintainers still want kuroo ~0.88.2 to go
> > stable?
> 
> Functionality missing/broken, so I'd say no, un'ccing arch herds for now.
> 
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > Maybe kuroo-0.80.2 could be stable on portage-2.0.* but not for 2.1*.
> 
> There is only stable. Not stable X and stable Y. Portage won't be slotted. And
> everyone should run 2.1. The only reason the 2.0 version is still in the tree
> is, that systems not having been updated for several months, can't directly
> update to Portage 2.1.

That's fine for kuroo then.

Any news on the stabilizing Kuroo front? Is there a reason it is masked?

> Any news on the stabilizing Kuroo front? Is there a reason it is masked?
Latest version kuroo, from site
(http://trac.kuroo.org/kuroo/browser/ebuilds/kuroo-svn-0.81.ebuild?format=raw),
works fine for me on amd64.

(In reply to comment #14)
> > Any news on the stabilizing Kuroo front? Is there a reason it is masked?
> Latest version kuroo, from site
> (http://trac.kuroo.org/kuroo/browser/ebuilds/kuroo-svn-0.81.ebuild?format=raw),
> works fine for me on amd64.
> 

That is good news :). Does it mean kuroo kan be unmasked for x86 too? 

(In reply to comment #14)
> Latest version kuroo, from site
> (http://trac.kuroo.org/kuroo/browser/ebuilds/kuroo-svn-0.81.ebuild?format=raw),
> works fine for me on amd64.

That's an svn ebuild, so we won't be adding it to portage.

(In reply to comment #15)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> That is good news :). Does it mean kuroo kan be unmasked for x86 too? 

Kuroo *isn't* masked, it's just not stabilised.

Arch teams, please stabilise app-portage/kuroo-0.80.2-r1.

x86 stable

(In reply to comment #17)
> x86 stable
> 

That is excellent news, thank you very much!

Charlie: Did you read this bug at all? Kuroo isn't even fully Portage 2.1
compatible, so I don't really see, how you can ask for stabilisation. 


Moreso Karim  stated in forums.g.o¹ that he doesn't even have time for the
project anymore, so it may be dead already.


[1] http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-533197.html

(In reply to comment #19)
> Charlie: Did you read this bug at all? Kuroo isn't even fully Portage 2.1
> compatible, so I don't really see, how you can ask for stabilisation. 
> 
> 
> Moreso Karim  stated in forums.g.o¹ that he doesn't even have time for the
> project anymore, so it may be dead already.
> 
> 
> [1] http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-533197.html
> 

Oops. What does this mean for the stable x86?

(In reply to comment #19)
> Charlie: Did you read this bug at all? Kuroo isn't even fully Portage 2.1
> compatible, so I don't really see, how you can ask for stabilisation. 

I assummed from Karim's "That's fine for kuroo then." that it was... sorry if I
misunderstood.

> Moreso Karim  stated in forums.g.o¹ that he doesn't even have time for the
> project anymore, so it may be dead already.

Yeah I noticed when digging around in svn nothing has been commited for the
past 3 months.

(In reply to comment #21)
> I assummed from Karim's "That's fine for kuroo then." that it was... sorry if 

It may doesn't matter when minor functionality of some application doesn't
work, but a frontend for Portage, that is more or less directed at new users
and not updating configuration files correctly - guess who is stepping up,
complaining about a fubared system and having no clue why, in the worst case.

(In reply to comment #22)
> (In reply to comment #21)
> > I assummed from Karim's "That's fine for kuroo then." that it was... sorry if 
> 
> It may doesn't matter when minor functionality of some application doesn't
> work, but a frontend for Portage, that is more or less directed at new users
> and not updating configuration files correctly - guess who is stepping up,
> complaining about a fubared system and having no clue why, in the worst case.

kuroo won't be marked as stable on ppc.

(In reply to comment #23)
> > It may doesn't matter when minor functionality of some application doesn't
> > work, but a frontend for Portage, that is more or less directed at new users
> > and not updating configuration files correctly - guess who is stepping up,
> > complaining about a fubared system and having no clue why, in the worst case.
> 
> kuroo won't be marked as stable on ppc.

Same for amd64. Sorry guys. 

Same for sparc, we have no stable.

Noone's left here, no reason to leave this open.

Will the x86 stable status be revoked?

The rumour of Kuroo's death have been greatly exagerated!
There is a new developer in town: Agathezol
Regards,
/Karim (initiator and maintainer of Kuroo)

(In reply to comment #28)
> The rumour of Kuroo's death have been greatly exagerated!
> There is a new developer in town: Agathezol
> Regards,
> /Karim (initiator and maintainer of Kuroo)
> 

Hey Karim, 

That is good news! Thanks for programming the Kuroo application I really like
it :-D