been in the tree for a while with no complaints, so unless Diego has a reason for not stabilizing it, let's gogogogogogogo
Archtested on x86: Everything fine
amd64 good. minor testing of runtime, functioned
just a warning: RDEPEND.suspect 2 sys-devel/flex/flex-2.5.35.ebuild: 'sys-devel/m4' sys-devel/flex/flex-2.5.35_p10.ebuild: 'sys-devel/m4' amd64 ok
(In reply to comment #3) > just a warning: > RDEPEND.suspect 2 > sys-devel/flex/flex-2.5.35.ebuild: 'sys-devel/m4' > sys-devel/flex/flex-2.5.35_p10.ebuild: 'sys-devel/m4' > > amd64 ok I believe the m4 RDEPEND was added because of bug 379355
+ 24 Sep 2011; Tony Vroon <chainsaw@gentoo.org> flex-2.5.35_p10.ebuild: + Marked stable on AMD64 based on arch testing by Blain "doc235" Anderson & + Agostino "ago" Sarubbo in bug #384221.
(In reply to comment #1) > Archtested on x86: Everything fine +1
x86 stable
arm stable
Stable for HPPA.
alpha/ia64/m68k/s390/sh/sparc stable
ppc done
ppc64 done, closing