Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 144084 - Please stabilize app-portage/kuroo-0.80.2-r1
Summary: Please stabilize app-portage/kuroo-0.80.2-r1
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High enhancement
Assignee: Gentoo KDE team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-08-16 01:59 UTC by Alexander Shiyan
Modified: 2007-03-17 08:11 UTC (History)
4 users (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 Alexander Shiyan 2006-08-16 01:59:21 UTC
Updated ebuild found on http://kuroo.org/kuroo/browser/ebuilds.
Also, please mark it as stable for amd64.
Comment 1 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-16 12:36:18 UTC
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?
Comment 2 Matteo Azzali (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-16 14:20:07 UTC
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.
Comment 3 Ioannis Aslanidis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-16 14:32:02 UTC
If you want a stabilization, just ask for it, however as carlo said, 30-day rule.
Comment 4 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-17 00:40:44 UTC
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
Comment 5 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-17 14:29:53 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> Do you want -r1?

Yes. If you choose to stabilize, use this one, please.
Comment 6 Karim 2006-08-18 01:21:55 UTC
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.
Comment 7 Andrej Kacian (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-25 14:15:56 UTC
With portage 2.1 in stable, do maintainers still want kuroo ~0.88.2 to go stable?
Comment 8 Karim 2006-08-27 22:21:30 UTC
(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*.
Comment 9 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-28 03:22:23 UTC
(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?
Comment 10 Simon Stelling (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-08-28 04:35:55 UTC
EAPI is concerned with ebuilds <-> portage compatibility, not frontends.
Comment 11 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2006-08-28 07:43:51 UTC
(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.
Comment 12 Karim 2006-09-02 02:54:27 UTC
(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.

Comment 13 Aniruddha 2007-02-16 09:11:15 UTC
Any news on the stabilizing Kuroo front? Is there a reason it is masked?
Comment 14 Alexander Shiyan 2007-02-16 17:10:04 UTC
> 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.
Comment 15 Aniruddha 2007-02-19 16:18:42 UTC
(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? 
Comment 16 Charlie Shepherd (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-19 17:20:25 UTC
(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.
Comment 17 Raúl Porcel (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-19 21:14:43 UTC
x86 stable
Comment 18 Aniruddha 2007-02-19 23:16:37 UTC
(In reply to comment #17)
> x86 stable
> 

That is excellent news, thank you very much!
Comment 19 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-19 23:43:36 UTC
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
Comment 20 Aniruddha 2007-02-19 23:47:11 UTC
(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?
Comment 21 Charlie Shepherd (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-19 23:53:29 UTC
(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.
Comment 22 Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-20 00:03:05 UTC
(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.
Comment 23 Tobias Scherbaum (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-20 17:52:56 UTC
(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.
Comment 24 Simon Stelling (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-02-28 12:31:32 UTC
(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. 

Comment 25 Gustavo Zacarias (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-03-12 14:32:42 UTC
Same for sparc, we have no stable.
Comment 26 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-03-16 00:53:54 UTC
Noone's left here, no reason to leave this open.
Comment 27 Aniruddha 2007-03-16 13:35:46 UTC
Will the x86 stable status be revoked?
Comment 28 Karim 2007-03-17 06:50:33 UTC
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)
Comment 29 Aniruddha 2007-03-17 08:11:11 UTC
(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