Needed for bug #485608. Target keywords: alpha amd64 arm hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86 @tex: Please add archs whenever you feel, this is ready.
hu ? no, just do the changes in place, no need for a stabilisation round for this
(In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #1) > hu ? no, just do the changes in place, no need for a stabilisation round for > this I was wrong, it is stable on x86.
(In reply to Christoph Junghans from comment #2) > (In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #1) > > hu ? no, just do the changes in place, no need for a stabilisation round for > > this > I was wrong, it is stable on x86. you're answering to the wrong bug I think :) what I mean is: your changes do not justify a rev bump
(In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #3) > (In reply to Christoph Junghans from comment #2) > > (In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #1) > > > hu ? no, just do the changes in place, no need for a stabilisation round for > > > this > > I was wrong, it is stable on x86. > you're answering to the wrong bug I think :) > what I mean is: your changes do not justify a rev bump Doesn't a EAPI bump forces a revision bump? <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2183/focus=2187> Anyhow, we are going from 0 to 5, that doesn't make me feel good without extensive testing!
(In reply to Christoph Junghans from comment #4) > Doesn't a EAPI bump forces a revision bump? > <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2183/focus=2187> your link says it all: installed file aren't changed, deps aren't changed, no subslot has been added, etc. package is basically the same -> no rev bump > Anyhow, we are going from 0 to 5, that doesn't make me feel good without > extensive testing! it is not _that_ of a jump if you know what you're doing :=)
(In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #5) > it is not _that_ of a jump if you know what you're doing :=) You convinced me! + 25 Sep 2013; Christoph Junghans <ottxor@gentoo.org> -xmltex-1.9-r3.ebuild, + xmltex-1.9-r2.ebuild: + EAPI bump without version bump (bug #486020)