Created attachment 305799 [details] experimental ebuild xdebug-client ebuild for xdebug-2.2.0_rc1
Comment on attachment 305799 [details] experimental ebuild No difference between xdebug-client-2.1.4.ebuild and this ebuild.
(In reply to comment #1) > Comment on attachment 305799 [details] > experimental ebuild > > No difference between xdebug-client-2.1.4.ebuild and this ebuild. Except the name.
We won't support xdebug 2.2 before either we plan stabilising 5.4 or it is marked stable upstream.
(In reply to comment #3) > We won't support xdebug 2.2 before either we plan stabilising 5.4 or it is > marked stable upstream. well, i don't know then why this masking stuff is there in portage then. worksforme, btw (gentoo-amd64, php-5.4, xdebug-2.2.0rc1, netbeans-dev) i just wanted to share the fruit of my efforts.
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > We won't support xdebug 2.2 before either we plan stabilising 5.4 or it is > > marked stable upstream. > > well, i don't know then why this masking stuff is there in portage then. > worksforme, btw (gentoo-amd64, php-5.4, xdebug-2.2.0rc1, netbeans-dev) > i just wanted to share the fruit of my efforts. ~arch is for mainly for testing. We can add rcs to ~arch if we feel it is something we want to test thoroughly. E.g with php we did it because bumping minor version requires a lot of ebuild changes. p.masking is mainly for stuff we do not think works properly. xdebug is such a minor package that we do not really need ebuild testing, it is trivial to bump themselves for those who reeeeally need it. So have a bit of patience. I am sure a stable candidate will surface soon :)