Ühel kenal päeval, P, 29.01.2017 kell 16:06, kirjutas Andreas K. Huettel: > However one valid point that came up in discussions is - whether an > arch > supports stable keywords is a per-arch setting, not a per-profile > setting. So > we can actually make things much easier (and the transition safer). > > Proposal No 2: > * Leave profiles.desc unmodified > * Introduce a new file arch.desc, which contains the "stability > status" of an > arch; > > Syntax: 2 columns, > # arch status > amd64 stable > mips testing > sh unstable > > The meaning of the keywords "stable", "testing", "unstable" is the > same as in > the previous proposal,
Maybe declare from the start that any extra columns should be silently ignored in implementations from start, as to be able to safely add more columns in the future without breaking backwards compatibility. > > "Does this arch support stable keywords, and how should "arch" vs. > > "~arch" > > be treated?" > > - "stable": separately check consistency of ~arch and arch tree, > > both have > > to be OK. This is what repoman is doing now, and is the default if > > the 4th > > column is undefined. > > - "testing": treat "arch" as "~arch" when requiring consistency, do > > not > > check "arch" alone. Useful if an arch wants to prepare going > > stable, useful > > for arch teams maintaining a pseudo-stable subset for stages. > > repoman could > > have a new command line switch that temporarily upgrades from > > "testing" to > > "stable" (for arch team work). > > - "unstable": check "~arch" only, "arch" in an ebuild produces a > > fatal > > repoman error > > The combination of current profiles.desc and new arch.desc provides > the same > flexibility as in the previous e-mail. > > Compatibility and transition: > > 0) PMS should be amended to allow the additional file. > > 1) Compatibility: No arch.desc and new system, or arch not listed in > arch.desc > *Arches* are treated as "stable" by repoman (current behaviour), with > profile > status according to profiles.desc. > Gentoolkit and other tools trying to determine a list of stable > arches should > fall back to current method of scanning profiles.desc for stable > profiles. > > 2) Compatibility: arch.desc and old system > Tools ignore the unknown file (?). > Repoman and other tools may emit surplus errors when profiles are > checked on > arches that are "testing" (they check the consistency of the stable > tree > alone, which is not OK, since "arch" is supposed to be treated like > "~arch"). > > 3) On introduction of the new column, it will be set to "stable" for > all > stable arches, "testing" for all arches where "inofficial" stable > keywords > exist (sh, s390, ...), and "unstable" everywhere else. Might want a "broken" (with maybe a better name) for some of these. I bet the ~arch of some of these is broken too, and no-one to respond to keyword requests, just happens when it happens. arm64 and mips are in that state too until we get that fixed and could move to "testing" and then later "stable" in case of arm64. > 4) Arches in "testing" or "unstable" may eventually consider re- > introducing > stable *profiles* so their deptree in ~arch remains consistent.
