| 1 |
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. |
| 2 |
<phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> The latest dev channel release of chromium (59.0.3053.3) will require |
| 4 |
>>=sys-apps/sandbox-2.11 to build. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I'm sending this announcement because this version of sandbox is |
| 7 |
> currently hard masked. So is the chromium version, but with its fast |
| 8 |
> release cycle we can expect it hitting ~arch in few weeks, and stable in |
| 9 |
> the next few weeks. I'd like to make sure we'd be able to push sandbox |
| 10 |
> to stable at the same pace, or find some alternative solution. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> For curious folks, new sandbox fixes a hang which occurs with tcmalloc. |
| 13 |
> See https://crbug.com/586444 . The new chromium adds a code generator |
| 14 |
> needed for build (inside the network stack). I didn't find an easy way |
| 15 |
> to disable tcmalloc just for that code generator, and after finding |
| 16 |
> above bug new sandbox seemed like the best choice. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> See |
| 19 |
> <https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/www-client/chromium?id=f2345c0af633116a69051239ab10d858d5aea69a> |
| 20 |
> for the commit which introduced this, and feel free to share your |
| 21 |
> suggestions. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
The sandbox blocker could be moved behind a use-conditional: |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
tcmalloc? ( !<sys-apps/sandbox-2.11 ) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
If vapier or the QA team don't drop the sandbox mask, we can |
| 28 |
package.mask the tcmalloc USE flag as an interim workaround. |
Archives