1 |
On Friday, September 23, 2011 17:44:50 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
2 |
> I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2 |
3 |
> packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those |
4 |
> revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's |
5 |
> zlib incompatible with upstream. |
6 |
|
7 |
the defines in question are internal to zlib. packages relying on them are |
8 |
broken, plain and simple. |
9 |
|
10 |
> As a result, a lot of packages stopped building. |
11 |
|
12 |
the *only* code that broke was code that was copied out of the zlib tree and |
13 |
directly imported into other projects -- minizip. because the code was |
14 |
designed to be compiled & linked as part of the zlib project, it uses internal |
15 |
zlib defines. projects copying the code into their own tree and not cleaning |
16 |
things up made a mistake. |
17 |
|
18 |
for many, this is a direct violation of Gentoo policy and they should be fixed |
19 |
to use the minizip code that zlib exports. for the rest that modify the code |
20 |
heavily, they should stop using the internal defines since their own code base |
21 |
doesn't support pre-ansi C compilers. |
22 |
|
23 |
> Bug reports for broken packages come in and then are being |
24 |
> modified to fit Gentoo's zlib. |
25 |
|
26 |
and those fixes can be sent to the respective upstreams |
27 |
|
28 |
> Breaking compatibility with upstream zlib also means that non-portage |
29 |
> software, the ones I install with "./configure --prefix=$HOME/usr && |
30 |
> make install", also won't build. |
31 |
|
32 |
send the fix to the upstream maintainer |
33 |
|
34 |
> It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that |
35 |
> deals with it was locked from public view: |
36 |
|
37 |
because you keep presenting the same flawed ideas and ignore the responses. |
38 |
in fact, all of the answers i posted above i already posted to the bug. |
39 |
-mike |