| 1 |
On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 12:29:11 +0200 |
| 2 |
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> > I felt the need to write the above because I have seen many |
| 5 |
> > instances where devs not familiar with Java packaging have made |
| 6 |
> > this mistake. Now I need to ask what to do in the case of ebuilds |
| 7 |
> > that have already been marked stable. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > To bring up a real example, I would like to bump dev-java/jna with |
| 10 |
> > a new SLOT for the new version. There are several reverse |
| 11 |
> > dependencies, 3 of which do not specify a SLOT, and 2 of these have |
| 12 |
> > already been marked stable. Upon giving jna a new SLOT, all these |
| 13 |
> > packages would instantly fail to build if jna:0 is not already |
| 14 |
> > installed and they would also fail to run if jna:0 gets depcleaned. |
| 15 |
> > Simply leaving the stable ebuilds as they are is therefore not an |
| 16 |
> > option. My preferred solution would be create a revbump that solely |
| 17 |
> > amends (R)DEPEND, leaving the KEYWORDS exactly as they are. This is |
| 18 |
> > controversial but what other choice is there? I could delay the jna |
| 19 |
> > bump but this would push back this thread of work by a month when I |
| 20 |
> > already have a huge backlog. Please do not let bureaucracy get in |
| 21 |
> > the way here. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Sounds good to me (as long as repoman agrees :). |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Turns out it doesn't agree. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
RepoMan scours the neighborhood... |
| 28 |
KEYWORDS.stable [fatal] 1 |
| 29 |
dev-embedded/arduino/arduino-1.0.5-r1.ebuild added with stable keywords: amd64 x86 |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
What are my options? Force it? :/ |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
James Le Cuirot (chewi) |
| 35 |
Gentoo Linux Developer |
Archives