I decided to go for option 2, consider it done.

Grobian wrote:
> Some of you might have noticed the Ruby (security) issue.  I'd like to 
> have a quick round on it.
> 
> A short situation sketch:
> - ruby 1.8.2 compiles with some patches made by usata on Panther
> - ruby 1.8.2 collides on Tiger with system installed ruby
> - ruby 1.8.2 contains security vulnerability and stuff
> - ruby 1.8.3 is safe(r)
> - ruby 1.8.3 doesn't compile on Panther due to autoconf 2.59 requirement
> - ruby 1.8.3 of course also collides on Tiger
> - ruby 1.8.2 is marked ppc-macos stable
> - ruby 1.8.3 is marked ~ppc-macos unstable
> 
> ruby is for Tiger in p.mask, since the sec. bug I added the mask in the 
> Panther profile too, however, that's not really a solution, and the sec. 
> guys want more action from us, basically.
> 
> I can think of three 'solutions':
> 1. drop ppc-macos keyword for all ruby keywords.
>    This is drastical, but since ruby won't have a nice mariage with OSX
>    using oldstyle Gentoo/OSX it solves the problem for good.
> 2. drop ppc-macos keyword in 1.8.2 and replace it with 1.8.3
>    This is bad because we basically drop the keyword, but it leaves us
>    with the 'desired' state of having only ~ppc-macos.
> 3. stable 1.8.3
>    This feels bad to me, but it's what the sec. guys want to see.  It
>    makes sense for progressive users (although I don't know of any real
>    ones).  We would stable a package without testing that is masked.
> 
> So, a quick round of input on any one of the three (or a solution I 
> haven't thought of) solutions would be nice, in order to 'fix' the ruby 
> bug instead of letting it slide.  It's wrong anyway.
> 
> 

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project -- Interim Lead
-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list