| 1 |
On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 17:06 -0600, Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Short response: reconsider. |
| 4 |
> ;) |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > Long answer: This is not a regression; you'll find the same problem in stable. |
| 7 |
> > It's an area where a slight error can break lots of things that are even |
| 8 |
> > slightly non-standard. This case where the bug is occurring is very |
| 9 |
> > non-standard and has not cropped up before (or at least hasn't been brought |
| 10 |
> > to anybody's attention) in the time since I (and you) have been with the |
| 11 |
> > project. Lastly, 2.3.5.200* is/was hard masked. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Yah it's a corner case, and yah few people are potential bitten by it |
| 14 |
> right now- that said, the severity of being bitten by it is why this |
| 15 |
> needs be released. Think about it, it's a cockup in our lib |
| 16 |
> handling... an area that needs to run pretty much perfect. A corner |
| 17 |
> case being spotted, even if upstream did something idiotic isn't |
| 18 |
> particular acceptable in that chunk of code (imo). |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Regression or not, I'm after having a fix deployed as quickly as |
| 21 |
> possible. Honestly, this reminds me of the early days of the daemon |
| 22 |
> where occasionally it would lose the env and install nothing- didn't |
| 23 |
> matter what the cause was, what mattered was that portage would go and |
| 24 |
> rape my glibc installation, hosing my box. Potential for hosing the |
| 25 |
> machine (correctable or not) via portage is a big no no from where |
| 26 |
> I'm sitting. Bugs of this sort are more then capable of driving away |
| 27 |
> a potential user/dev who has the misfortune of hitting it (masked or |
| 28 |
> otherwise). |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> ~harring |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Would it be that hard to put an exception check for lib versioning (or |
| 34 |
any package) to check a file of known bad versioning for just such |
| 35 |
instances and use the also listed regard_as_version so that it is |
| 36 |
treated properly. It would mean not having to patch portage to catch |
| 37 |
specific versioning flaws each time they crop up. Just add it to the |
| 38 |
list. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
eg: |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
libfoo-2.3.5.200* libfoo-2.3.5_p200* |
| 43 |
libc-2.3.90.so libc-2.3.5_p90 |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
Brian <dol-sen@×××××.net> |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives