1 |
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 07:00:16PM +0100, David Leverton wrote: |
2 |
> On Thursday 12 June 2008 02:46:03 Jim Ramsay wrote: |
3 |
> > David Leverton <levertond@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
> > > Since at least one ebuild has already been modified specifically to |
5 |
> > > work around the bug, I'd say it's pretty real. |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > For those of us trying to play along at home, which one is this? |
8 |
> |
9 |
> http://tinyurl.com/4w4t69 |
10 |
|
11 |
Few things I'll note about this stupid, stupid mess- looks of it, |
12 |
paludis folk have known about this for a while. In other words, folk |
13 |
bitching about 'improving' QA intentionally sat on a bug for the sake |
14 |
of mocking, bug which according to them ebuild devs have supposedly |
15 |
worked around (yet to see it, but it's viable). |
16 |
|
17 |
Useful to the whole, I'm sure. Same folk in control of PMS for those |
18 |
playing the home game, politics over QA seemingly. |
19 |
|
20 |
So what was the bug? Aside from having to walk the full eapi-1 bugs, |
21 |
(ebuild referenced wasn't of use), majority of which actually *is* |
22 |
tested in pkgcore (unlike portage which makes one wonder why pkgcore |
23 |
is targeted), the fault is a simple defaulting of an unset var being |
24 |
missed in implementing an undocumented spec (honestly, where is eapi1 |
25 |
spec?). |
26 |
|
27 |
Literally, the BS of the last day all comes down to inability to state |
28 |
the following: |
29 |
|
30 |
=== modified file 'pkgcore/bin/ebuild-env/ebuild-functions.sh' |
31 |
--- pkgcore/bin/ebuild-env/ebuild-functions.sh 2007-11-12 01:17:24 +0000 |
32 |
+++ pkgcore/bin/ebuild-env/ebuild-functions.sh 2008-06-11 22:24:16 +0000 |
33 |
@@ -236,7 +236,7 @@ src_compile |
34 |
{ |
35 |
if [ "${EAPI:-0}" == 0 ] ; then |
36 |
[ -x ./configure ] && econf |
37 |
- elif [ -x ${ECONF_SOURCE}/configure ]; then |
38 |
+ elif [ -x ${ECONF_SOURCE:-.}/configure ]; then |
39 |
econf || die "econf failed" |
40 |
fi |
41 |
if [ -f Makefile ] || [ -f GNUmakefile ] || [ -f makefile ]; then |
42 |
|
43 |
|
44 |
Bit of a dumb bug, but it occurs unfortunately. And yes, bash bits |
45 |
aren't currently tested since they're going to be completely ripped |
46 |
out and replaced (in the process shifting where/how it's accessed). |
47 |
|
48 |
Why the exherbo/paludis/PMS folk decided to go this route to report, |
49 |
I'm not quite sure aside from assuming they're just griefers. |
50 |
|
51 |
Regardless, fixed, released as 0.4.7.4, and in the tree. |
52 |
|
53 |
Cheers |
54 |
~harring |