[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs graphviz, graphviz2, graphvizdevel, g(...)

[Peter Bonivart]

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Peter Bonivart's message of Tue Jul 05 14:13:08 -0400 2011:
>
>> > Darn... I looked in i386. This raises the question of the 2 testing
>> > platforms: are they identical? Me think that no.
>>
>> You're right:
>
> These boxes aren't really "maintained" as much as the current and
> unstable hosts.  They're basically:
>
> I need this, so I install it.  That doesn't get applied evenly.  The
> nature of their use doesn't lend itself to applying updates across the
> board either, although we could definitely improve that.

Yes, but how should we proceed here? Normally you build on current och
unstable hosts depending on which catalog you're targeting but I
assume they needed packages from the graphviz project installed during
the builds so they used testing and this kind of thing can always
happen with testing.

Wouldn't it be best to downrev testing9s to match testing9x (at least
when it comes to iconv)? I took the liberty of removing the new iconv
packages so testing9s and testing9x should now be the same.

@PeterF: please give it another try.

When I look at the testing servers I see that they diff a lot from the
unstable catalog which probably make they somewhat risky to build on.
Maybe they should be "reset" from time to time or that large projects
like graphviz get their own build hosts.

/peter