Accourding to the homepage (http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/) the latest
version of Bonnie++ is 1.03a and then there are some experimental versions. In
portage the latest of these dev releases are marked as stable for most
Steps to Reproduce:
What's your trouble with that one? Does not work for you?
Both works for me. All 1.9x releases are experimental releases from the yet to
become stable 2.0 branch. The latest release in the stable branch is 1.03a.
I though that it were policy to mark upstream alpha and beta releases as
There is no such strict policy - see
for more info.
From the link:
"...if Gimp decides to release an unstable/development series marked as 1.3.0,
then these ebuilds should be put in package.mask because the software itself is
of development quality and is not recommended by the developers for distribution."
As I understand it, an experimental branch like this should be in package.mask.
Am I misunderstanding the policy?
Yeah, and "it is up to the maintainer of the package to deem which versions are
stable or if development versions should be in package.mask or left in ~arch."
The software just works fine, there has not been a single bug about it for
almost one year. If you don't like it, then put it into
/etc/portage/package.mask. I don't see any benefit from putting a thing which
works fine on multiple arches into ~arch or even package.mask.