Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage: good news and bad news

[Terje Kvernes]

Daniel Robbins <drobbins@g.o> writes:

> Bad news: I found a significant bug in Portage 2.0.10 and earlier
> that could cause masking to work improperly, particularly if a
> package has a ~ entry in the profile's packages file.

  ick.  this means users might have gotten masked packages
  installed?
 
> Good news: I've fixed the problem in Portage 2.0.11 by rewriting
> portage.py's portdbapi xmatch() and visible() methods.  This has
> resulted in a 44% speed-up in dependency calculations over Portage
> 2.0.10.  If you thought things were fast before...

  well, I've never really thought much about the time it takes to do
  dependency calculations.  there are other issues I'd rather look at.
 
> More good news: I've improved repoman to differentiate between
> user-visible ebuilds with bad dependencies and masked ebuilds with
> bad dependencies.  When checking dependencies, user-visible ebuilds'
> dependencies are only matched against user-visible ebuilds. But when
> masked ebuilds are checked, deps are satisfied using *all* available
> ebuilds.  This should eliminate virtually all false positives in the
> repoman DEPEND and RDEPEND QA tests. Type "repoman --help" for more
> information on these new changes.

  hm. I haven't seen repoman before, seems nice.  also, somone[tm]
  introduced the "mirror://sourceforge"-syntax.  when was this done?

  I am trying to contribute ebuilds and fiddle with portage, but there
  doesn't seem to be to much information about internal changes coming
  down from gentoo-core.  I've been trying to get the internals of
  portage into my head, but changes happen and I'm not totally sure
  what ends those changes are about, hence it is difficult to really
  contribute.

  and I can't really subscribe to gentoo-core now, can I?  :-)

-- 
Terje