On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 08:00:11PM +1000, Phillip Berry wrote: > Just wondering if there has been any progress on the stable portage tree? > > Also, syncing the normal tree removes old versions of ebuilds, obviously this > is inappropriate for a production environment where for various reasons it is > sometimes neccessary to stay at an arbitrary version of an application. The > loss of the ebuild specific to the legacy version of the application is a > pain, will the stable tree retain older versions of ebuilds instead of > removing them?
I think it isn't totally difficult to develop and maintain a stable tree for
an environment. You install Gentoo, let the install go through a few pillars
depending on your environment. Then, monitor Portage upgrades and backport
those to your stable environment.
I have had good luck with this approach for dedicated servers. After all,
when you know what software is available on the server (only a small portion
of all the software available through Portage) upgrades are a lot less
frequent.
Any upgrades that are pending (for instance JRE updates if you are running
J2EE servers) can easily be sorted out. It's still a lot of manual work
though, but I think it isn't easy to concentrate this on the distribution.
After all, one environment always differs from another. Where minor upgrades
are acceptable by a few, others might not like it.
Wkr,
Sven Vermeulen
--
Gentoo Foundation Trustee | http://foundation.gentoo.org
Gentoo Documentation Project Lead | http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gdp
Gentoo Council Member
The Gentoo Project <<< http://www.gentoo.org >>>
pgp1UccWElrYo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
