Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Revisions for USE flag changes
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 14:14:27
Message-Id: 265b4480-8425-4c52-df23-0cf423e1c7f4@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Revisions for USE flag changes by Rich Freeman
On 08/12/2017 06:29 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > My gut feeling is that the change you want is probably a good thing, > but it will never happen if you can't provide a single example of > something bad happening due to the lack of a revbump.
There's an unfixed security vulnerability with USE=foo, so we drop the flag temporarily. Users who had USE=foo enabled will keep the vulnerable code installed until they update with --changed-use or --newuse. Even with the devmanual improvements, the advice we give is conflicting: * If you fix an important runtime issue, do a revbump. * If you drop a USE flag, don't do a revbump. What if you fix a runtime issue by dropping a flag? It's more confusing than it has to be: the USE flag exception interacts weirdly with all the other rules.

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Revisions for USE flag changes Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>