I'll quote vapier in an e-mail from gentoo-dev on 01/11/2008: after dealing with m68k, mips, and the *-fbsd ports, i think we could do with a new state for profiles.desc. the new field would simply be "exp" to indicate that the profile is experimental and that qa tools should generally not issue warnings about them. so in repoman's default mode, you wouldnt get any warnings, but if you were to run it in full mode, you'd see stuff like normal. this is useful for new projects which are still in the process of merging (like *-fbsd, m68k, and any new hardware i get my hands on) and are not really ready for "dev" marking. there are plenty of warnings in packages right now due to these profiles being labeled as "dev" that are the sole problem of the keyword maintainer in question and not the package maintainer. http://groups.google.com/group/linux.gentoo.dev/browse_thread/thread/2f7277923ff092b5 As far as I know, there wasn't any followup on this, and a quick search in bugzie didn't turn up anything. Mips is eager to use this feature to convert our stable keywords to unstable, as the sheer volume of stabilization requests we get per day is too much for the current manpower we have.
sorry for dropping this kumba :/ wolf also wanted a "deprecated" or "dead" or similar keyword so that we could enumerate all profiles in the profiles file, even the deprecated ones
If we want to be backward compatible the we'll have to introduce a now file since old versions of repoman will treat an unsatisfied dependency as fatal if the last column contains anything except "dev".
i dont think we care. changing the behavior to have repoman warn verbosely on unknown profiles sounds like a saner upgrade path for the future.
Created attachment 144749 [details, diff] for extensibility, ignore labels other than "stable" or "dev" If we're not going the backward compatibility route, then we'll have to wait until this patch is in stable portage and all devs will then have to upgrade as soon as we start using new labels.
(In reply to comment #3) > i dont think we care. changing the behavior to have repoman warn verbosely on > unknown profiles sounds like a saner upgrade path for the future. Hmm, if there's an unrecognized profile label I guess repoman should advise the user about the problem and bail out (advising them to upgrade). TODO: implement
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) > > i dont think we care. changing the behavior to have repoman warn verbosely on > > unknown profiles sounds like a saner upgrade path for the future. > > Hmm, if there's an unrecognized profile label I guess repoman should advise the > user about the problem and bail out (advising them to upgrade). TODO: implement Makes sense. I was under the impression devs should be using the latest repoman available, since older versions can do things differently that could break the tree (like, the removal of digests and all)
This is fixed in 2.1.5_rc1.
