On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:59:25 +0100
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> > Users unmasking toolchain packages need to be paying close attention
> > to what's going on behind the scenes. They're in the tree for people
> > who know what they're doing to test. Even unmasked, toolchain
> > revbumps are expensive and we do them only when absolutely necessary.
>
> I think users would appreciate it if you mentioned that in the mask
> message. Just for the future.
>
# Mark Loeser <halcy0n@gentoo.org> (24 Apr 2010)
# Masked for testing. Only use this version of gcc if you know what you are
# doing
=sys-devel/gcc-4.5*


--
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

On Saturday, November 20, 2010 21:57:21 Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 01:38:23 +0200 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> > On 11/21/2010 12:46 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > > I'm unmasking sys-devel/gcc-4.5.1 tomorrow. I'd like to recommend
> > > everyone who has already unmasked it to rebuild it now as there has
> > > been some important patches added recently (see ChangeLog).
> >
> > revbump?
>
> We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages.

well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the masked
package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at that point.
-mike

Mike Frysinger posted on Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:57:50 -0500 as excerpted:

> well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the
> masked package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at
> that point.

User-side ++

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

is emerging sys-devel/gcc-4.5.1-r1 enough?

thanks!
-alessandro-
*Here i am, A young man,
*A crashing computer program,
*Here is a pen, write out my name.

On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 14:14, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> Mike Frysinger posted on Sun, 21 Nov 2010 14:57:50 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>> well, not quite. *the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the
>> masked package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at
>> that point.
>
> User-side ++
>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred. * No HTML msgs.
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
> and if you use the program, he is your master." *Richard Stallman
>
>
>

On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 21:32:30 -0800
spinugio <spinugio@gmail.com> wrote:

> is emerging sys-devel/gcc-4.5.1-r1 enough?

Yep.


--
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> writes:

> well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the masked
> package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at that point.

Is there somewhere which tells users when there are upgrades to
toolchain packages which are not revbumped once they have been unmasked
and in ~arch?

A case in point, glibc-2.12.1-r3. When I rebuilt this following the
merging of linux-headers-2.6.36, the rebuilt downloaded about 700K of
patches.

On Tuesday, November 23, 2010 01:36:15 Graham Murray wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> writes:
> > well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the
> > masked package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at
> > that point.
>
> Is there somewhere which tells users when there are upgrades to
> toolchain packages which are not revbumped once they have been unmasked
> and in ~arch?

if they arent revbumped, then the changes dont matter to you

> A case in point, glibc-2.12.1-r3. When I rebuilt this following the
> merging of linux-headers-2.6.36, the rebuilt downloaded about 700K of
> patches.

irrelevant to your KEYWORD
-mike

On 11/23/2010 09:32 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:

On Tuesday, November 23, 2010 01:36:15 Graham Murray wrote:

Mike Frysinger<vapier@gentoo.org> writes:

well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the
masked package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at
that point.


Is there somewhere which tells users when there are upgrades to
toolchain packages which are not revbumped once they have been unmasked
and in ~arch?


if they arent revbumped, then the changes dont matter to you


This isn't always the case though, due to developer mistakes. Sometimes
when doing emerge -e system, there are changes in /etc files that affect
runtime behavior rather than build behavior. And it seems to happen
quite often. This is with non-masked packages though.


It's the reason I do emerge -e system quite often (every 3 months or
so); runtime fixes are applied by devs without revbumps.

On Tuesday, November 23, 2010 02:56:17 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 11/23/2010 09:32 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 23, 2010 01:36:15 Graham Murray wrote:
> >> Mike Frysinger writes:
> >>> well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not revbump the
> >>> masked package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump it just once at
> >>> that point.
> >>
> >> Is there somewhere which tells users when there are upgrades to
> >> toolchain packages which are not revbumped once they have been unmasked
> >> and in ~arch?
> >
> > if they arent revbumped, then the changes dont matter to you
>
> This isn't always the case though, due to developer mistakes.

now you're talking about a bug that should be reported
-mike

Hi,

Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@arcor.de>:
> On 11/23/2010 09:32 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 23, 2010 01:36:15 Graham Murray wrote:
> >> Mike Frysinger<vapier@gentoo.org> writes:
> >>> well, not quite. the way we agreed in the past was to not
> >>> revbump the masked package, but once it was unmasked, we revbump
> >>> it just once at that point.
> >>
> >> Is there somewhere which tells users when there are upgrades to
> >> toolchain packages which are not revbumped once they have been
> >> unmasked and in ~arch?
> >
> > if they arent revbumped, then the changes dont matter to you
>
> This isn't always the case though, due to developer mistakes.
> Sometimes when doing emerge -e system, there are changes in /etc
> files that affect runtime behavior rather than build behavior. And
> it seems to happen quite often. This is with non-masked packages
> though.

Sometimes it is not a mistake but laziness. Some minor fixes in
configuration files are quite common.

V-Li

--
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/>