Mind me; I haven't read up on the bugs, and this is probably a dumb
place to admit this.

MySQL (to me) is an one of those instances where different major
versions of the software serve almost different purposes. In this case I
 believe debian got it right by having the default be the oldest
supported stable release, while more recent stable versions are
available by non-default.

Just a note, don't get too peeved,
-Dormando

Sancho2k.net Lists wrote:
> Lance Albertson wrote:
> 
>>Ben Munat wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Anyone know what's taking so long to get MySQL 4.1 unmasked? I'm getting
>>>a lot of guff about how 4.1 has been available for over a year and it's
>>>the latest *stable* version version at the MySQL site. I appreciate the
>>>fact that the devs want to make sure it's extra, extra stable, but even
>>>just a rough guess when it will be ready would help. Maybe there's a dev
>>>lurking nearby??
>>
>>
>>The main mysql dev has been dealing with a lot of real-life issues (school,
>>exams, etc) and hasn't had the appropriate time to make this work. However, he
>>does have someone he wants to bring on board to help take care of mysql and 
>>has
>>been doing a great job so far. I've been following bug 83011 as things get
>>closer to getting into portage.
>>
>>About the unmasking... I'm not sure, 4.1 introduces a lot of migration 
>>headache
>>so the transition will need to have some kind of sane flow. I'm not the person
>>to really comment on that!
> 
> 
> Yes, consider the new dependencies for the DBD-mysql module, as well as
> the fact that several other applications in Portage just Don't Work with
> 4.1.x and later. Sometimes with Portage, it's a lot harder than just
> getting an updated ebuild. You have to consider the effect it has on
> Portage as a whole.
> 
> Gentoo devs: is there any more specific testing that users can do to help?
> 
> DS
-- 
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to