Current state of Testing

elahav · 2005-08-22 19:28:12

Can someone please bring me up to date on the state of Testing, and especially the move to gcc 4? I understand that this transition is holding back many updates which are sitting in Testing and haven't made it to Current for quite some time (e.g., KDE 3.4.2 was released on July 28th, almost a month ago).
I understand that upgrading gcc is quite a task, so I am not complaining about the lag. I would, however, like to see some information on what's going on. I was quite disappointed when the last news letters contained no updates on the progress being made.

Elad

P.S.,
If the accumulation of updates in Testing is not due to gcc 4, please correct me.

T-Dawg · 2005-08-22 21:16:12

I don't think its so much a hard task, but the fact the devs are waiting for a "stable" gcc4 release. Apparently its still a little quirky.

JGC · 2005-08-22 21:48:10

GCC 4.0.1-1 broke my xorg release, so we have to release another one, which is a public snapshot released by the GNU people.

At this stage, we're also starting with operation libtool-slay, which means we delete .la files from most packages. This means we need to recompile most of the packages in the distribution. When most is done, we'll move everything to current/extra. With this operation, it's not the running system that breaks, but the compiling system that breaks. If you forget one package, every package that depends on that package refuses to compile.

elahav · 2005-08-23 00:23:19

If this is the case then it was probably a mistake to move to gcc 4 at this stage. As I understand it, packages should not wait in Testing that long. Perhaps the move should have occured in Unstable first?
I am not bashing anyone, just trying to see if there's a lesson for the future.

sepht · 2005-08-23 05:36:57

elahav wrote:

Perhaps the move should have occured in Unstable first?

As far as I can tell packages in unstable can coexist with packages in current or extra, whereas the packages in testing are simply new release that are being tested.

JGC · 2005-08-23 06:21:25

Besides the xorg problem, I haven't seen any problems with gcc4 up to now. Most packages compile fine, some need a bit of patching.
For xorg: I compiled a new snapshot of gcc and compiled xorg with that, problem I had is gone...

sepht · 2005-08-23 06:26:48

what people fail to realize is while GCC4 has some bugs.. it's often the code thats going to need fixing not the compiler... the GCC guys consider it to be usable, and with FC, and Ubuntu running GCC4 systems, your going to see a lot more compatible code pop up very soon.
(If you disagree, ignore me, I don't know what I'm talking about at this hour)

elahav · 2005-08-23 13:59:35

Regardless of the definitions of Testing and Unstable (can we have an official comment on that?) it seems pretty obvious to me that upgrading KDE from 3.4.1 to 3.4.2 is not the same as the transition from gcc 3.x to gcc 4.x. The fact that the first is now dependent on the second may suggest a certain problem in the development process.
In most projects there are two main branches: one dedicated to fixes and minor upgrades to the current stable version, and one where major changes can be tested independently.

P.S.,
A preemptive strike against the imminent "compile KDE 3.4.2 yourself" response: I am not whining specifically about KDE 3.4.2, it's just an example. Take a look at Testing and see the abundance of packages that have been stuck there for a while.

dtw · 2005-08-23 14:31:11

elahav wrote:

Regardless of the definitions of Testing and Unstable

This is an offical comment - Testing is for new version of apps already in current and extra - Unstable is for all other apps e.g. -devel versions, which will "never" be in current/extra while a "stable" counterpart exists.

e.g. fvwm and fvwm-devel

elahav · 2005-08-23 14:59:54

dibblethewrecker wrote:

Testing is for new version of apps already in current and extra - Unstable is for all other apps e.g. -devel versions, which will "never" be in current/extra while a "stable" counterpart exists.

I had some problems with this definition at first, but now I see what you mean:

Packages in Testing, once approved, enter Current AS IS. Therefore, we can treat Testing as a Release Candidate.
Packages in Unstable do not make it into Current, but provide a test bed for future stable versions. Unstable is thus the Alpha/Beta branch.

In that case, shouldn't gcc 4 have made it to Unstable (despite what the maintainers say, it is clearly not a very stable product yet)?

phrakture · 2005-08-23 15:16:42

elahav wrote:

The fact that the first is now dependent on the second may suggest a certain problem in the development process.
In most projects there are two main branches: one dedicated to fixes and minor upgrades to the current stable version, and one where major changes can be tested independently.

Maybe this would be something good to bring up on http://distrodev.org/ (*looks at Xentac*)

sepht · 2005-08-23 17:59:25

maybe we should. But who has the heart to post stuff on there. I registered but I still don't feel like I'm on level footing
No worrys, just ignore my post.

Xentac · 2005-08-23 18:05:15

Maybe, except that I didn't want it to become a my-way's-better-than-your-way site or a these-are-all-the-problems-with-the-distro-I'm-complaining-about site. Though talking about theoretical development processes based on existing development processes would probably be fine. Especially how they improve the existing structure.

It all comes down to how you approach it.

Arch Linux

#1 2005-08-22 19:28:12

Current state of Testing

#2 2005-08-22 21:16:12

Re: Current state of Testing

#3 2005-08-22 21:48:10

Re: Current state of Testing

#4 2005-08-23 00:23:19

Re: Current state of Testing

#5 2005-08-23 05:36:57

Re: Current state of Testing

#6 2005-08-23 06:21:25

Re: Current state of Testing

#7 2005-08-23 06:26:48

Re: Current state of Testing

#8 2005-08-23 13:59:35

Re: Current state of Testing

#9 2005-08-23 14:31:11

Re: Current state of Testing

#10 2005-08-23 14:59:54

Re: Current state of Testing

#11 2005-08-23 15:16:42

Re: Current state of Testing

#12 2005-08-23 17:59:25

Re: Current state of Testing

#13 2005-08-23 18:05:15

Re: Current state of Testing

Board footer