| 1 |
Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I think |
| 2 |
we should start working out the kinks well in advance. Toolchain has |
| 3 |
already added a package.use.force-ed "crypt" USE flag to |
| 4 |
sys-libs/glibc-2.30-r2 [2]. The main alternative out there is libxcrypt, |
| 5 |
which I have recently bumped and added a package.use.mask-ed "system" |
| 6 |
USE flag to make it provide the "system" version of libcrypt.so. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
To give us time to work out dependencies in advance, I would like to |
| 9 |
propose a virtual to provide libcrypt.so, and we can gradually update |
| 10 |
all users of libcrypt to {R,}DEPEND on this virtual. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Maybe once this is in place and the obvious/common packages are |
| 13 |
updated, we could request a tinderbox run to flush out what was missed. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
[1] https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=NEWS;h=50479f17c9a3a5ef074dafa3f23aca954b82bd6a;hb=HEAD#l768 |
| 17 |
[2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/699422 |
Archives