On Sunday, July 31 at 13:31 (+0100), Stroller said:
> Yeah, I specifically wanted to stave off suggestions of "you should > unmask the ~86 versions of portage, anyway", as I think I saw that > view aired fairly robustly in another thread recently and it's really > not for me. > > I was also quite conscious of this because this seems to be a new > change for me, but most of the users of this list seem to use ~x86 / > ~amd64, so will presumably have encountered this change months ago. > > I googled, but I didn't find this change obviously documented > anywhere. I probably used the wrong keywords, but I'd love to know > where this *is* documented. It seems like the kinda thing that would > be announcing. I've not seen anyone on this list suggest switching to unstable as to fix a bug, though admittedly I don't follow all threads and even the ones I do follow I don't follow fully usually as the signal/noise ratio gets pretty bad over time. But anyway, this isn't even a bug, just a change of behavior. Where were you expecting this "announcement". There usually aren't announcements on gentoo-user. However, it is stated in the ChangeLog (which is where you should alwaysb check first ;-). Also, there was a change to how portage handles virtuals, which was also discussed some weeks ago. But it may not have been done in stable then. They also removed flex, bison, and other things from the system profile. This has broken a few ebuilds (I think I created at least 3 bugs myself). Again, there wasn't an "announcement" AFAIK, you just have to check the ChangeLogs and bugzilla. Anyway I don't think they "announce" every change they make to portage, but they do seem to appear in the ChangeLogs. -a
