Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 2005-07-24 ~ 2005-07-28 Portage Bug Summary

[Zac Medico]

Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First bug summary. Only four days worth here but, in light of my previous
> announcement, I figure that I should send it out early. Next one will come on
> Tuesday and then on Sundays after that.
>
> I've done no cleaning of this list whatsoever so you'll find some of these
> are already closed, are duplicates or aren't portage bugs at all. I've
> ordered it by number of changes followed by reverse bug number. The theory
> goes that the bugs that are important (at least to users) and the bugs
> that are likely to be easy to fix will float to the top.
>
> If you're interested in helping, start at the top and investigate downward
> until you hit something that tickles your fancy. Then see if you can figure
> out what's going wrong and post some patches (either here or bugs.gentoo.org,
> preferably both). These are only bugs that have gone to dev-portage@g.o
> but, if there is demand, I can automate some similar reports for tools-portage
> and sandbox as well.
>
[snip]
> 100479    Something broken in dblink.getcontents when parsing a broken
>           CONTENTS

Thanks Jason, I like this!

I believe that I've squashed Bug 100479.  The problem here is that we are iterating through pkgfiles.keys() and inside the iteration loop we modify the obj variable so subsequent calls to pkgfiles[obj] may fail with the reported error.

for obj in mykeys:
	obj=os.path.normpath(objkey)
	if obj[:2]=="//":
		obj=obj[1:]

The obvious solution is to use a separate variable for the pkgfiles key.  My patch introduces a new variable called objkey and replaces all pkgfiles[obj] calls with pkgfiles[objkey].  See portage-2.0.51.22-dblink.unmerge-pkgfiles-key.patch attached to the bug.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list