Duncan wrote:
Diego Elio Pettenò posted on Sat, 02 Oct 2010 03:06:56 +0200 as excerpted:
Il giorno sab, 02/10/2010 alle 00.42 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan ha scritto:
Right, so a few weeks later when they re-merge a binpkg, they suddenly
get build failures again. And that confuses them since it's unexpected.
This is in general a bad experience for stable users who want to get
work done, not baby-sit their system.
Seriously, how many times do you re-install packages out of binpkgs on a
_build_ system?
Frequently enough for it to be a consideration. Among other things, it's
a fast way to roll-back to a working version when a new version goes
haywire, for whatever reason.
I strongly recommend that users enable FEATURES=buildpkg for a host of
reasons, and having it break or cause additional complications for them is
not a good thing. Of course I also strongly recommend lafilefixer (based
on your blog, BTW), too, but yeah, people /do/ sometimes reinstall from
binpkgs on a build system. Having binpkgs around for my build system has
saved my behind a number of times!
Same here. That has saved me a lot of time and frustration in the past
as well. I have had buildpkg set in make.conf for ages. I use it
regularly and would not want to have that messed up. I recently used it
when a KDE upgrade went bust. Without being able to go back to the old
binaries, I would have had almost a day of compiling and no GUI at all.
With it, just a hour or so for it to unpack and put it back.
Some people may not have it set or use it but there are people that do.
Dale
:-) :-)
