Gentoo Archives: gentoo-catalyst

From: "Rick \\\"Zero_Chaos\\\" Farina" <zerochaos@g.o>
To: gentoo-catalyst@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] [PATCH 0/2] Blacklisting binary packages
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:09:31
Message-Id: 517150A6.8020207@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-catalyst] [PATCH 0/2] Blacklisting binary packages by "W. Trevor King"
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 On 04/16/2013 03:42 PM, W. Trevor King wrote:
5 > From: "W. Trevor King" <wking@×××××××.us>
6 >
7 > The current approach to avoiding problems due to stale binary packages
8 > with untracked ABI dependencies is to disable binpkg use during
9 > troublesome sections of the build (e.g. seed updates). I think that a
10 > cleaner solution would be to use a configurable spec option
11 > blacklisting binpkgs for troublesome packages. For example, in a
12 > stage1 with update_seed enabled, the Portage emerge (before the seed
13 > update) has:
14 >
15 This needs to remain optional. I'm not going to nack a patch that some
16 people may find useful but in my personal opinion this is a terrible
17 solution that should not be used. We need to find a way to rebuild
18 packages as needed (like EAPI 5) not force a rebuild everytime.
19
20 - -ZC
21 > …
22 > removed '/usr/portage/packages/sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3.tbz2'
23 > removed '/usr/portage/packages/sys-devel/gcc-config-1.7.3.tbz2'
24 > emerge --quiet --usepkg --buildpkg --newuse --oneshot --nodeps --update sys-apps/portage
25 > …
26 >
27 > During the seed update, the rest of the packages can use preexisting
28 > binpkgs from earlier builds:
29 >
30 > …
31 > >>> Emerging binary (1 of 17) sys-devel/gnuconfig-20121010
32 > >>> Installing (1 of 17) sys-devel/gnuconfig-20121010
33 > >>> Emerging binary (2 of 17) app-misc/mime-types-9
34 > >>> Installing (2 of 17) app-misc/mime-types-9
35 > >>> Emerging (3 of 17) sys-libs/timezone-data-2013a
36 > >>> Installing (3 of 17) sys-libs/timezone-data-2013a
37 > …
38 >
39 > I'm not sure yet why some packages (e.g. timezone-data) don't use the
40 > prexisting binpkgs, even though they do exist:
41 >
42 > # ls packages/default/stage1-i686-2013.1/sys-libs/timezone-data-201*
43 > packages/default/stage1-i686-2013.1/sys-libs/timezone-data-2012j.tbz2
44 > packages/default/stage1-i686-2013.1/sys-libs/timezone-data-2013a.tbz2
45 >
46 > Later in the stage1 build, GCC is not installed from a binary package
47 > (because this package was removed earlier):
48 >
49 > …
50 > >>> Emerging binary (59 of 75) virtual/libc-0 for /tmp/stage1root/
51 > >>> Installing (59 of 75) virtual/libc-0 to /tmp/stage1root/
52 > >>> Emerging (60 of 75) sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3 for /tmp/stage1root/
53 > >>> Installing (60 of 75) sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3 to /tmp/stage1root/
54 > …
55 >
56 > I think this approach is cleaner because it:
57 >
58 > * Avoids problems we've already seen by blacklisting troublesome
59 > packages.
60 > * Allows you to reuse binary packages in the seed update stage, at the
61 > cost of rebuilding gcc for your stage1root.
62 > * Can be applied to any stage, so you don't get bitten by stale
63 > binpkgs in stage2, etc. due to a snapshot update.
64 > * Can be overridden by folks who know some blacklisted package will be
65 > fine for their combination of seed, snapshot, and pkgcache.
66 >
67 > W. Trevor King (2):
68 > spec: Add binpkg_blacklist option for troublesome packages
69 > Revert "don't build packages during update_seed"
70 >
71 > modules/generic_stage_target.py | 4 +++-
72 > targets/stage1/stage1-chroot.sh | 4 ++--
73 > targets/support/chroot-functions.sh | 5 +++++
74 > 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
75 >
76
77 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
78 Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
79 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
80
81 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRcVCmAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKD40QALjM2FK1L8wiwOQfuov9lMjZ
82 WO2Qqmyx+asctFdtmpU9QV8GP3j68ZgFM3L/EhWSK0Fi3O9QiEiXXjdnSEH8iqF4
83 SsMvhCP2l05mBvYYrmpeHKCPmDLxGWB6ppMl/gNLzDOBNSk3VBwXILk5N2PN0QXz
84 3mnD48QeMd9sAVHKSFOoaY2SsHLQBR6WEH+wdq+bJmrwU8Y949hOksxm65itII+V
85 1jMpTo5hhBwrdqI04Uk0FQBnqF06zhm8eZO2HhbaFF4P5l+BCahFle+96T3X+ktZ
86 NN4hw+5woxQOlPe8I2VX/4TdRtRvosdDkop3NnaBENKLu5pTqc0UsuRCw/DQolBg
87 cgZJ3i6zYDjUTWCGq67nPVZtp3seS9hWJ75s/r8OKumpev+v4WDWt1XbY6UEChXg
88 4uTSD1lRLV+sXVNJthd5BGQb36mXiVM2muja2edOQfUHp1zxXJD3TklHXenDRw4w
89 zioui7bsSi0ywI0ftdqff7M9XqlvogGQyduWswnPtoLOrDx32Z+UrAeAfihV9vHy
90 ywhIb5n/EfBplARkSl+Q7QMemgrB2PEEIQJFLbZaGTHgAtTAwzcc3s5wB7KHIDvb
91 RJ320R51FgWKgqqO1R6Bpqr2U6lUbE03uQDVlW82AWLM/WTRWgF+Fs18gHhvIo7n
92 LOCMQuXVOV9HtRhYrfq9
93 =R5YJ
94 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-catalyst] [PATCH 0/2] Blacklisting binary packages "W. Trevor King" <wking@×××××××.us>