Summary: | rsync x86/~x86 status confusing in packages.gentoo.org | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Daniel Webert <rockoo> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers> |
Status: | VERIFIED TEST-REQUEST | ||
Severity: | major | CC: | marduk |
Priority: | Highest | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Daniel Webert
2004-05-19 12:14:57 UTC
grr, does packages.g.o still not work for hardmasked packages? seems so, i think we need a fourth indicator besides ~, + and - which indicates if a version has been hard-masked. packages.g.o is one prob ... but why does my emerge favour a 'older' unstable (2.6.0-r1) version instead of a 'newer' stable (2.6.2-r3) version? first read, then write :) masked one :( - i should get some sleep ... but can we push the 2.6.2 version a little bit, its already a r3, and everybody wants it >=net-misc/rsync-2.6.2 has issues when syncing, see bug 49933
once this has been sorted out, the mask will be removed
packages.g.o identifies hard masks. Please test. --m http://packages.gentoo.org/ebuilds/?rsync-2.6.2-r3 The text is at the bottom and took me twice to see it. The green check mark still says that it is stable, also the bug displayed for ~arch. How about a red cross when it is hard-masked? I don't know if portage supports per arch package.mask yet or if they will be implemented with cascaded profiles. The listing on the frontpage will also still show the green check mark and bug. http://packages.gentoo.org/packages/?category=net-misc;name=rsync But, I would like to have it also here, replacing the ~ and + indicators with another indicator on red background to indicate that this version is hard-masked. please also add the term hardmasked to the tooltip-function of the tablecell <snip> <td class="archcell" arch="+" masked="true" title="marked stable for ppc">+</td> </snap> I'd like to keep the [-+~] symbols for packages. Because if one wanted to remove a hard mask from a package, they may want to know if the package is even available for their platform. I did, however, add the tooltip indicating that the package is hard masked. jep the old -+~ style is good, but why don't we add a 'M' like in the etcat-output ... the red-cellbackground is good, but i think a 'M+' disitinguish a stable, but hardmasked package very clear :) <snip> porkoo rockoo # etcat -v rsync [ Results for search key : rsync ] [ Candidate applications found : 6 ] Only printing found installed programs. * net-misc/rsync : [ ] 2.6.0 (0) [ ~ ] 2.6.0-r1 (0) [M~ ] 2.6.2 (0) [M ] 2.6.2-r1 (0) [M ] 2.6.2-r2 (0) [M I] 2.6.2-r3 (0) </snap> Agreed. I think it's less confusing now. Closing. |