Bug 73241 – Call for arch stabilizations of busybox-1.00-r1

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description solar (RETIRED) 2004-12-03 10:32:32 UTC]

Arch maintainers we have begun the process of marking busybox-1.00 stable. 
Please q/a and do the same for your respective arch or note here that I'm allowed 
to mark your arch as stable. I want to flush the older and unneeded ebuilds from 
the tree after arch stabilizations and confirm that everything is peachy.

Current:
busybox-0.60.3-r1:  ~alpha
busybox-0.60.3-r2:  -* -amd64
busybox-1.00_rc3:  ppc ~sparc hppa arm 
busybox-1.00:  ~amd64 ~hppa x86 ~mips ~ppc sparc ~arm

[Comment 1 Daniel Black (RETIRED) 2004-12-08 05:45:41 UTC]

ppc stable.

Note that although it appeared to fail a few self tests. Busybox did actually work. Test errors are due to small display discrepancies between busybox and the coreutils that they mirror.

Tests that did fail:
cp-does-not-copy-unreadable-file
du-h-works
du-m-works
ls-l-works
ls-s-works
strings-works-like-GNU

[Comment 2 solar (RETIRED) 2004-12-09 12:04:38 UTC]

mips/arm please test and stabilize. Your arches are core in the embedded world.

[Comment 3 solar (RETIRED) 2005-03-14 19:39:41 UTC]

tested on mipsel with -r1 using gentoo ebuild and all seems stable.
I intend to mark 1.00-r1 stable for mips sometime tmw afternoon due to timeout from the herd.

[Comment 4 Jan Brinkmann (RETIRED) 2005-03-28 15:35:14 UTC]

busybox-1.00 stable on amd64

[Comment 5 Omkhar Arasaratnam (RETIRED) 2005-04-08 11:24:13 UTC]

busybox is stable on ppc64 - please mark testing at least if not stable

[Comment 6 solar (RETIRED) 2005-04-08 11:38:56 UTC]

busybox-1.00-r1.ebuild marked ~ppc64

[Comment 7 Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) 2005-05-12 09:59:28 UTC]

alpha is happy.

Cheers,
Ferdy

[Comment 8 solar (RETIRED) 2005-07-24 15:35:21 UTC]

stable on all arches