Gentoo Archives: gentoo-security

From: warnera6 <warnera6@×××××××.edu>
To: gentoo-security@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-security] org-x11 GLSA 200509-07. Is bug #96053 fixed in -r3? (black icons)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 02:36:33
Message-Id: 43278A8B.7000101@egr.msu.edu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-security] org-x11 GLSA 200509-07. Is bug #96053 fixed in -r3? (black icons) by William Kenworthy
William Kenworthy wrote:
> I'm using the workaround of manually deleting the problem patch during > the build. > > The problem for gentoo that I see is that with the removal of -r1 (and > xfree being the only viable alternative is not available either), gentoo > does not have a usable desktop for those actually using it in > production, so this should be viewed as a serious issue that requires > active resolution - just leaving this issue in place until we catch up > with upstream means this is going to become a running sore for gentoo. > > We (the users) need a stable, secure, and working X. > > BillK
The whole point of Gentoo is that you have the Ultimate say on what goes. If you don't like the current version of X you can write your own ebuild and do it however you like. No one forces you to use the ebuilds put out by the developers. If you want the -r1 version feel free to go into ViewCVS and get it; it should still be there. If you want your solution to be merged, you are better off trying to convince xorg's maintainer and you are better off having the work laid out to be done so that it's not a PITA for them to integrate it into Gentoo's tree. This mailing list is not the place for discussion of how the bug should be patched in the source, or whining because the ebuild the developer provided doesn't suit your particular needs. Make an overlay, modify the ebuild, and hazzah your needs are met. Gentoo has never promised a stable solution and unless the relevant GLEP is taken up by someone and implemented probably never will. -- gentoo-security@g.o mailing list