Summary: | net-www/mozilla-firefox-1.0-r3 works on amd64 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Randall Nortman <gentoobugs> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | AMD64 Project <amd64> |
Status: | RESOLVED LATER | ||
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | AMD64 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Randall Nortman
2005-01-28 09:28:17 UTC
-r3 exists solely for hppa. Please don't ask for marking ebuilds stable, unless the ebuild was added ~50 days before and you really need a feature. Also search for open bugs before asking. There are reasons, why ebuilds don't go straigt stable. Sorry, I was only reporting that it works for me, as requested by the AMD64 team. I'm not asking that it be made stable, just trying to provide a potentially helpful data point in deciding when to make it stable. If there's a better way to do this than by filing a bug report, then the AMD64 docs should be updated accordingly. If we're really supposed to wait 50 days before reporting that it works (which doesn't make much sense to me), than this should also be mentioned in those docs. The docs that I refer to are at: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/technotes.xml?part=1&chap=3 The following is a direct quote: "Your diligent efforts in testing applications is[sic] greatly appreciated. In the following we want to explain the steps to submitting a bug report if you want to let us know that a masked application works on your Gentoo/AMD64 installation." It continues to describe the process, which I followed exactly. If I'm misinterpreting something, please correct me. If the -r3 ebuild is for HPPA only and you don't want amd64 users (with the best of intentions) testing it out for you and reporting their results, then perhaps the ~amd64 keyword should be removed. >If we're really supposed to wait 50 days before reporting that it works (which doesn't make much sense to me), than this should also be mentioned in those docs. Well, our ebuild policy is ~30 days before anything may go stable, if there is no major bug. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=3 Regarding stabilization developers agree to disagree. I for one think no arch should go stable before the maintainer of the particular packages decides, that the ebuild is stable. In this case a quick look at the ChangeLog reveals, that it makes not much sense to let everyone recompile just to have the latest ebuild revision stable. amd64 herd: It's quite annoying, when every arch has it's own "bug policy". That all makes sense to me. I'm sorry to be a pain! I was only trying to be helpful. Feel free to ignore/reject this "bug", and I won't open it again. i won't mark it stable before maintainer arch did so. feel free to reopen when that's the case |