Summary: | Stabilize app-shells/bash-3.2_p39 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | SpanKY <vapier> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Gentoo's Team for Core System packages <base-system> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | enhancement | Keywords: | STABLEREQ |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | 226505, 251812 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
SpanKY
2008-08-17 14:46:33 UTC
This requires >=sys-apps/portage-2.1.5. portage-team: Can =sys-apps/portage-2.1.5.6 go stable? (In reply to comment #1) > portage-team: Can =sys-apps/portage-2.1.5.6 go stable? There are a couple of things about 2.1.5.6 to be aware of: * We still need to update the docs for bug #226505, which is the only blocker of bug #226505). * The version of repoman's new 'inherit.autotools' check that's in 2.1.5.6 has some false positives that are fixed in svn: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/portage?view=rev&rev=10721 I think the above issues are negligible, so it's probably fine to go ahead and have =sys-apps/portage-2.1.5.6 marked stable. Should there be a separate bug calling for stabilization? Unless there's some really compelling reason that bash-3.2_p39 needs to be stabilized asap, I'd suggest waiting for a sys-apps/portage-2.1.5.7 release since there are lots of fixes that I'd like to merge from trunk. I've started working on it and it should be ready in 2-3 days. there isnt anything pressing ... it can wait for portage to go stable Stable on alpha. Parallelizing stabilizations is a bad idea. Reverted the bash stabilization. sparc stable Stable for HPPA. amd64/x86 stable ppc64 stable ppc stable Stable on alpha. arm/ia64/s390/sh stable |