On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 20:03:30 +0100 Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 21 August 2013 19:28, Alexis Ballier <aball...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > Instead of dropping them entirely to ~arch, maybe something in > > between could be done: Said arches could start moving to ~arch the > > leaf and less important packages. E.g. we have (had?) a lot of > > sparc keywords on sound packages or ppc keywords on ocaml ones > > because at some point (~10 years ago) some dev was interested in > > these on this architecture but I'm pretty sure nobody uses them. > > > > In short: Reduce stable coverage to reduce the workload. > > > > Also, from what I've seen in the thread, you are talking about > > keywords only, right ? Do these arches keep their stable mark in > > profiles.desc? > > > > I am not familiar with portage internals to understand what > implications will an ~arch only architecture have if marked as stable. > Is there a good reason for that? Oh yes: Forbid broken deptree. x86-fbsd has always been dev profile + ~arch only. It is almost impossible to move it to stable profile since people (almost) never run 'repoman -d' and even less file bugs when they introduce broken deps. It is common to have portage bail out when updating your system because someone introduced a broken dep and didnt pay attention. amd64-fbsd is stable profile + ~arch only. People do it the correct way, which is: drop keywords, file a bug. Since we do not have a huge tree coverage here, I get about 5 such bugs a months, which are not hard to handle.
