| 1 |
Mike Doty wrote: |
| 2 |
> Alec Warner wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Just make you aware, not everyone follows portage development and its |
| 4 |
>> bound to bite some people in the ass (although I expect the users will |
| 5 |
>> notice the most). |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> Recently commited to svn (but afaik released only in ~arch) is code to |
| 8 |
>> prevent the sourcing of ebuilds with no manifest. Thus ebuilds you |
| 9 |
>> randomly download off of bugzilla need to get a lookover from you and |
| 10 |
>> then ebuild foo.ebuild digest'd. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> This is to prevent people from sticking a random unchecksum'd ebuild |
| 13 |
>> in your tree and then having portage source it for depend() metadata |
| 14 |
>> and then getting bitten by some global scope nasties. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> This 'feature' is currently controlled via strict, so those that hate |
| 17 |
>> hate hate it can turn it off via FEATURES="-strict" |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> It's implemented in doebuild, so any ops that aren't |
| 20 |
>> 'digest/manifest/help' aren't allowed on manifest-less ebuilds. This |
| 21 |
>> includes the 'ebuild' utility. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> Having FEATURES="digest" should also disable this check. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> I figured people would start asking about the failures, so better to |
| 26 |
>> explain now ;) |
| 27 |
> The error is obvious and contains the solution or will we have a influx |
| 28 |
> of bugs? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
That depends on how smart people are :p |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
The error is basically "manifest missing for /path/to/missing/manifest" |
| 33 |
and then it dies. You could probably convince Zac to add the solution |
| 34 |
or a link to a URL that explains what to do. |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives