Tracking bugs required for KDE 4.3.3 stabilization, and providing a list for arch's. Users (and developers): No unnecessary talking here, please. Open a new bug for new issues.
Created attachment 209693 [details] kde-base/ pkgs for KDE 4.3.3
Please also consider 292204.
if USE=samba, >=kiobase-kioslaves-4.3.3-r1 depends on samba-client (masked), so please consider bug 288517 as well
Created attachment 211162 [details] downgrade kdebase-kioslaves dep to -r0 for now
Please do.
kdebase-kioslaves-r0 doesn't block anymore (kdestable-2.txt works concerning my last remark) now kde-base/kvtml-data-4.3.3 is masked/missing in the list (remark: USE=-kdeprefix required if kdeprefix is still set).
Yep add to the list =kde-base/kvtml-data-4.3.3
Created attachment 211500 [details] added =kde-base/kvtml-data-4.3.3 Compilation / dependencies work now; users must delete their nepomuk file storage (rm -fr $HOME/.kde4.2/share/apps/nepomuk/repository/) and re-index. See "dolphin search box" bug in the list of dependecy bugs.
amd64 stable (if in any doubt, follow the amd64 keyword for revision bumps)
app-arch/xz-utils-4.999.9_beta needs to be stabled too since it's required by new kdelibs when lzma USE flag is enabled
(In reply to comment #10) > app-arch/xz-utils-4.999.9_beta needs to be stabled too since it's required by > new kdelibs when lzma USE flag is enabled > Untrue, there's 3 fine placed package.use.mask's in base/ for xz-utils now. I've just mailed vapier (xz-utils) and flameeyes (libarchive) when it's ready to go stable.
Then, I will sync again in an hour or so since emerge wants me to unmask it, maybe I haven't get the use.mask yet :-/
Created attachment 211559 [details] List of Packages Marked for PPC including deps Here are the packages that ppc/ppc64 marked stable, including missing dependencies. Hope this helps the other arches.
ppc/ppc64 marked stable.
Created attachment 211576 [details] Updated list including the revisions
Hi all, Could anybody please explain, what's wrong with stabilization for x86? As I see there is a number of bugs, blocking the stabilization, but the stabilization for other platforms was performed. -- Regards, Mike.
(In reply to comment #16) > Could anybody please explain, what's wrong with stabilization for x86? As I Nothing wrong, it's just taking it's time. We are all volunteers, you know...
(In reply to comment #16) > Could anybody please explain, what's wrong with stabilization for x86? As I > see there is a number of bugs, blocking the stabilization, but the > stabilization for other platforms was performed. Maybe the bugs described in the blockers did not appear on the other architectures. So far KDE 4.3.3 is ok here on x86, but test failures should be resolved somehow.
x86 stable
Moving to bug 300393.