On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Deutschmann <whi...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > It isn't like security project adds any additional load to any arch > team, an architecture capable to keep up with normal keyword and > stabilization requests should also be able to keep up with security.
What about arches that use stable keywords only on a core set of system packages to indicate that they're usable, so that they can have a stage3 that actually boots? I'm not sure they even keep up with security in this case. Perhaps they could just use ~arch for the same purpose, but then we'd need to have a policy that REMOVES ~arch when doing bumps on those architectures, which is not our current practice. Otherwise a revbump could break stage3 on those arches. I'm not sure that stable+secure is necessarily a black-and-white thing on our non-mainstream arches. Honestly, I think that people who want to run linux on MIPS/sparc/etc are probably happy enough just to have something that boots. -- Rich
