| Summary: | sys-apps/portage-2.1.10.49 stable request | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Zac Medico <zmedico> |
| Component: | Conceptual/Abstract Ideas | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | Keywords: | STABLEREQ |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | 2.1 | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 402213 | ||
|
Description
Zac Medico
2012-03-15 18:15:07 UTC
Stable for HPPA. amd64: pass repoman whines about a lot of stuff can those be hidden ? (In reply to comment #2) > repoman whines about a lot of stuff can those be hidden ? The dependency.unknown warnings are all for valid deps. On possible way to make it more quite would be to add way to create a whitelist of known good atoms, as mentioned in bug 382407, comment #4. The portage.internal warnings about env-update are all false positives. I'm currently working on moving that code that triggers it into a Makefile, which will suppress the warning. ppc64 done ppc done amd64 ok repoman only complains about versions other than 2.1.10.49 for me x86: pass + 17 Mar 2012; Tony Vroon <chainsaw@gentoo.org> portage-2.1.10.49.ebuild: + Marked stable on AMD64 based on arch testing by Elijah "Armageddon" El + Lazkani & Michael "n0idx80" Harrison in bug #408391. (In reply to comment #7) > x86: pass Also fine for me on x86. x86 stable, thanks Mikle and Myckel arm stable alpha/ia64/m68k/s390/sh/sparc stable |
