| 1 |
Dr Rainer Woitok <rainer.woitok@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> 1. Why do the package properties "isstable" and "!isunstable" differ |
| 4 |
> from each other in four out of five output lines? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
isstable means that a package is ARCH, |
| 7 |
isunstable means that it is ~ARCH (for your ARCH). |
| 8 |
For other arches there is isalienstable. |
| 9 |
Your particular package |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> app-crypt/tpm2-tss 2.3.3 0 1 |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
fails to be ARCH for any value of ARCH, and it is |
| 14 |
~ARCH only if ARCH=amd64. So the first 0 is not |
| 15 |
surprising. The second value depends on your ARCH; |
| 16 |
Since {isunstable} fails, I suppose that your ARCH is not amd64. |
| 17 |
If you would use {isalienstable} the test would be positive. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> 2. Why does the package property "isstable" return different values, de- |
| 20 |
> pending on whether it is called via the "<installedversions:...>" or |
| 21 |
> "<availableversions:...>" property? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
installedversion returns the details of the version in /var/db. |
| 24 |
Note that there need not even be an ebuild anymore for that version, |
| 25 |
so this is really all information which one can rely on for that |
| 26 |
version. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
But /vat/db does not contain any information whether the version |
| 29 |
is stable, unstable, or alienstable, so these tests do not make |
| 30 |
any sense for installed versions. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
eix does not print an error if you query that information anyway, |
| 33 |
but the return value for any such test (isstable, isunstable, |
| 34 |
isalienstable, etc) is always empty (false). |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> 3. How can I reliably retrieve the correct information whether a package |
| 37 |
> is "stable" or "testing" for both properties, "<installedversions>" |
| 38 |
> and "<availableversions>"? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I suppose that this question is answered with the above ones. |
Archives