| 1 |
I don't see deep in the topic but I think the file should be renamed |
| 2 |
somewhere. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
1) It could probably be renamed at the source /distfiles/ directory, but |
| 5 |
then there would be problem with the download from vendor where the file |
| 6 |
has still the original name. |
| 7 |
2) When ebuild downloads the file (with name given by vendor), it could |
| 8 |
save it under another name to the /usr/portage/distfiles/ (or the file |
| 9 |
could be renamed after it is downloaded). When user has to download the |
| 10 |
file manually, he/she should be instructed to save the file as |
| 11 |
/usr/portage/distfiles/file-name. It is important to download the fresh |
| 12 |
file and not to use the old one laying somewhere on the disk. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I think it is not important what suffix will be appended to the file |
| 15 |
name but it could be transparent to use release string (or something |
| 16 |
other appropriate) from the ebuild name (something like "-r1") where the |
| 17 |
new file is used the first time. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
These are just thoughts, I don't know how the whole portage works. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Miroslav Šulc |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Joshua Nichols napsal(a): |
| 26 |
> It seems some of the VM vendors, mostly Sun and IBM, just love to |
| 27 |
> release new versions of their VMs, but without changing the filename |
| 28 |
> they get released as. In short, this means that it breaks our ebuilds, |
| 29 |
> because the instructions for getting the file are the same, but the file |
| 30 |
> it leads to is different, and therefore the digest breaks. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> There are currently at least 3 bugs filed for this issue: |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127204 |
| 35 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123590 |
| 36 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122220 |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> There are a few solutions. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> * Just redigest the ebuild with the new distfile. This would be the |
| 41 |
> quickest solution, but it'd be problematic because then the digest would |
| 42 |
> be broken for people that already have the distfiles. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> * Have users rename the files. This is used in a few cases at least. |
| 45 |
> This leads to the question of how to version the ebuilds though, because |
| 46 |
> they don't follow a sane (to us) versioning scheme, ie GA, SR-1, SR-2, etc. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> * Some totally awesome way I haven't of yet. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> Thoughts? |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
> - Josh |
| 53 |
> |
Archives