Re: pkgsrc-2024Q3 net/tigervnc is broken on sparc64

[Sad Clouds <cryintothebluesky%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:09:01 -0400
Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:

> Sad Clouds <cryintothebluesky%gmail.com@localhost> writes:
> 
> > Hello, in the email subject I specified pkgsrc-2024Q3 release. I tend to
> > use stable branches and I guess many other people do the same.
> 
> sorry, missed that.
> 
> > I have already reverted locally to the previous version which works.
> > This was just a suggestion so that others don't have to face the same
> > issues. I appreciate that people cannot test all packages on all
> > supported architectures, but when someone finds stability issues with
> > packages on a stable pkgsrc branch, perhaps there needs to be a policy
> > of rectifying that? As you noted, debugging, getting stack traces,
> > reporting upstream and waiting for developers to apply fixes is not
> > going to be quick.
> 
> There is not a policy that it has to be fixed, and there are no people
> obligated to solve your problem.  There are instead people willing to
> give you advice so that you can solve your own problem, and share that
> with others.
> 
I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. I'm not demanding that anyone
solves my problems. I'm simply trying to have a conversation about how
regressions and instabilities are resolved in pkgsrc stable releases.

> You are welcome to debug it and create a patch, and ask that this be
> applied to head, and then to ask that it be pulled up.  This should
> start with an upstream bug report.  That is how this problem should be
> addressed, not by jumping to the conclusion that pkgsrc should adopt new
> policy.
I don't believe I suggested anything unreasonable. If there is no
interest from pkgsrc developers to consider ways of addressing latent
issues with packages in stable releases, then let's leave it at that. I
solved the issue locally for myself, I was trying to suggest ways to
improve user experience for others.