Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 132086 - gaim-2.0.0_beta3 should be unmasked and maybe marked stable
Summary: gaim-2.0.0_beta3 should be unmasked and maybe marked stable
Status: RESOLVED LATER
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: AMD64 Linux
: High enhancement (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo Net-im project
URL: http://gaim.sourceforge.net/
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-05-02 22:11 UTC by movrev
Modified: 2006-05-08 20:36 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description movrev 2006-05-02 22:11:12 UTC
I've been using the unstable/hard-masked versions of Gaim 2.0.0 betas since they came out on portage and I've had no problems other than some minor bugs that gaim news warned about.

I think that beta3 should be considered stable and I'd strongly suggest to unmask it since it's working without any noticeable flaws (tested almost all features on IRC, MSN, Yahoo, ICQ, and Jabber).
Comment 1 Steev Klimaszewski (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-02 23:16:49 UTC
Unmasked possibly, but stable, I would definitely say no
Comment 2 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-02 23:31:16 UTC
Stable? Stable?! 
 ________  __  __  ____ _ 
|__  / _ \|  \/  |/ ___| |
  / / | | | |\/| | |  _| |
 / /| |_| | |  | | |_| |_|
/____\___/|_|  |_|\____(_)

http://tinyurl.com/zb3ax
Comment 3 Olivier Crete (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-03 08:03:46 UTC
it will be unmasked when upstream declares it stable.. 
Comment 4 movrev 2006-05-03 09:54:29 UTC
INVALID????
How should I file a request for marking stable or unmasking a package other that as a bug in "gentoo linux" marked as an enhancement?

(In reply to comment #3)
> it will be unmasked when upstream declares it stable.. 

I assume upstream means the gaim developers. If that is the only way to go then so be it. I still think beta 3 is stable enough to at least unmask it.

As I said, in my case I haven't had one problem with it, whereas I had a minor bug with beta2 (buddies wouldn't be sorted well by status). From all the open bugs from comment #2 (http://tinyurl.com/zb3ax) there is only one that pertains to beta3 (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=129630) and not only does it seem it should be closed because it has been fixed by the reporter, but also I haven't had any problems with google talk so far.

Portage 2.0.54 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.5, glibc-2.3.6-r3, 2.6.15-gentoo-r7 x86_64)
=================================================================
System uname: 2.6.15-gentoo-r7 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3500+
Gentoo Base System version 1.6.14
ccache version 2.3 [enabled]
dev-lang/python:     2.3.5-r2, 2.4.2
dev-util/ccache:     2.3
dev-util/confcache:  [Not Present]
sys-apps/sandbox:    1.2.12
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-r1
sys-devel/binutils:  2.16.1
sys-devel/libtool:   1.5.22
virtual/os-headers:  2.6.11-r2
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="amd64"
AUTOCLEAN="yes"
CBUILD="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=athlon64 -O2 -pipe"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3.3/env /usr/kde/3.3/share/config /usr/kde/3.3/shutdown /usr/kde/3.4/env /usr/kde/3.4/share/config /usr/kde/3.4/shutdown /usr/kde/3/share/config /usr/lib/X11/xkb /usr/share/config /var/qmail/control"
CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/eselect/compiler /etc/gconf /etc/splash /etc/terminfo /etc/env.d"
CXXFLAGS="-march=athlon64 -O2 -pipe"
DISTDIR="/usr/portage/distfiles"
FEATURES="autoconfig buildpkg ccache distlocks fixpackages sandbox sfperms strict"
GENTOO_MIRRORS="http://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo ftp://mirror.datapipe.net/gentoo http://gentoo.mirrors.tds.net/gentoo"
LANG="en_US"
MAKEOPTS="-j2"
PKGDIR="/usr/portage/packages"
PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/var/tmp"
PORTDIR="/usr/portage"
SYNC="rsync://rsync.us.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage"
USE="amd64 X aac alsa arts audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bonobo bzip2 cdr cli crypt cups curl dri dvd dvdr eds emboss encode esd exif expat fam ffmpeg firefox foomaticdb fortran gif glut gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile idn imagemagick imlib ipv6 isdnlog java jpeg lcms ldap lzw lzw-tiff mad mng motif mp3 mpeg nas ncurses nls nsplugin nvidia ogg openal opengl oss pam pcre pdflib perl png pppd python qt quicktime readline reflection sdl session spell spl ssl tcpd theora tiff truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts udev usb vorbis xine xinerama xml xml2 xorg xpm xscreensaver xv xvid zlib userland_GNU kernel_linux elibc_glibc"
Unset:  ASFLAGS, CTARGET, INSTALL_MASK, LC_ALL, LDFLAGS, LINGUAS, PORTDIR_OVERLAY
Comment 5 movrev 2006-05-08 00:22:26 UTC
Reopening so as to bring attention to comment#4 and the resolution as Invalid which I still don't fully understand.

Regarding the upstream, which as I said before I assume is the gaim developers, I talked to Sean Egan recently and he said Gaim-2.0.0 is almost code complete. Hopefully, it will come out of beta soon and consequently out of the hard mask. The only reason I want this to happen is because I, perhaps wrongly, believe that if gaim is not masked, but at most unstable, then more of the gentoo community will be using/testing it and thus contributing to the development of it.
Comment 6 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-08 14:48:10 UTC
This thing is NOT stable and crashes like hell. It's also beta. Will be unmasked when/if maintainer considers it ready. Thanks.
Comment 7 movrev 2006-05-08 20:36:22 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> This thing is NOT stable and crashes like hell. It's also beta. Will be
> unmasked when/if maintainer considers it ready. Thanks.

Ok, because of your drastic experiences, I'd definitely leave the package as unstable. I still don't understand what can be going wrong with your installation of beta3 since I never had any stability issues with mine at all (whereas I had some minor bugs, as I wrote in Comment #4, with beta2).

I respect your opinion and obviously understand that unmasking it is a matter of the maintainer, but I thought it would be good to share my good experience with beta3. Someone once told me that submitting a bug in "Gentoo Linux" as an enhancement was good practice for contributing about stability issues in ebuilds. Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Lastly, I don't think that being a beta version has anything to do with masking a package, since there are tons of things we use in beta state without a glitch. I believe a package should be masked only when it is very unstable and/or breaks the system, which, as you said, seems to be your case somehow.

Thanks.