[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 06:36:15 + 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. Gotcha. > 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? At least for gcc I put bug numbers and info into the ChangeLog. If you're fanatic you can subscribe to the gentoo-commits ml and set up some filters (that's what I do ;)). Generally if you're not actively hitting a showstopping bug, you don't need the update. And if you are, you're probably on the CC list in bugzilla. > 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. As Mike said, this was adding support for other architectures that were previously not keyworded. -- fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime @ gentoo.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
Hi, Nikos Chantziaras : > 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. > 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 http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/> signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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. 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.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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 > 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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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? 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.
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 21:32:30 -0800 spinugio 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.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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.dun...@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 > > >
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:59:25 +0100 Michał Górny 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 (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.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On 11/21/2010 08:49 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:54:19 +0200 Alex Alexander wrote: On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 01:47:57AM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +1300 Alistair Bush wrote: We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages. Why not? Yeah why not? do you inform users of this? 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. If you pushed important fixes to gcc, you should revbump it before unmasking it. If you skip the revbump, I'm sure most users will miss this. There's virtually no expense to a revbump in this case. You just asked every user currently using gcc-4.5.1 to rebuild it, isn't a revbump the best, safest way to do that? Since everyone and their dog seems to have unmasked it already I'll make an exception. :-P I don't know about the others, but I unmasked it in order to test it against non-portage compiles. Just because people unmask it doesn't necessarily mean they switched their system gcc profile to it. The problem should be obvious; those people will then see that it got unmasked, so will assume it's ready for testing in-tree packages with it and switch their gcc profile. But without a revbump...
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:54:19 +0200 Alex Alexander wrote: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 01:47:57AM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > > On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +1300 > > Alistair Bush wrote: > > > > > > > We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages. > > > > > > > > Why not? > > > > > > Yeah why not? do you inform users of this? > > > > 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. > > If you pushed important fixes to gcc, you should revbump it before > unmasking it. > > If you skip the revbump, I'm sure most users will miss this. > > There's virtually no expense to a revbump in this case. You just asked > every user currently using gcc-4.5.1 to rebuild it, isn't a revbump the > best, safest way to do that? Since everyone and their dog seems to have unmasked it already I'll make an exception. -- fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime @ gentoo.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On 11/21/10 08:47, Ryan Hill wrote: > toolchain revbumps are expensive How expansive? More than a rebuild of GCC itself? Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 01:47:57 -0600 Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +1300 > Alistair Bush wrote: > > > > > We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages. > > > > > > Why not? > > > > Yeah why not? do you inform users of this? > > 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. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
В Вск, 21/11/2010 в 01:47 -0600, Ryan Hill пишет: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +1300 > Alistair Bush wrote: > > > > > We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages. > > > > > > Why not? > > > > Yeah why not? do you inform users of this? > > 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 don't see any reasons not to revbump package even if it was hardmasked... -- Peter.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 01:47:57AM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +1300 > Alistair Bush wrote: > > > > > We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages. > > > > > > Why not? > > > > Yeah why not? do you inform users of this? > > 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. If you pushed important fixes to gcc, you should revbump it before unmasking it. If you skip the revbump, I'm sure most users will miss this. There's virtually no expense to a revbump in this case. You just asked every user currently using gcc-4.5.1 to rebuild it, isn't a revbump the best, safest way to do that? -- Alex Alexander | wired + Gentoo Linux Developer ++ www.linuxized.com pgppwbotqb0dQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 17:35:18 +1300 Alistair Bush wrote: > > > We don't do revbumps on masked toolchain packages. > > > > Why not? > > Yeah why not? do you inform users of this? 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. -- fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime @ gentoo.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
> On 11/21/2010 04:57 AM, 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. > > Why not? Yeah why not? do you inform users of this?
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
On 11/21/2010 04:57 AM, 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. Why not?
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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. -- fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime @ gentoo.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: GCC 4.5 unmasking tomorrow
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?
