Re: [gentoo-user] Re: About procmail and getline

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sunday 14 June 2009 19:38:42 Harry Putnam wrote:
> Sebastian Günther <samson@××××××××××××××××.de> writes:
> > * Harry Putnam (reader@×××××××.com) [12.06.09 16:41]:
> >> There is a patch offered but still one would think using standard
> >> emerge on a package that is outside the `~' daredevil stage and is not
> >> masked, it should `just work' [tm].
> >
> > When I read the bug rightfully, procmail did not build with glibc
> > 2.10.1, which is *not* stable yet, especially because of a lot packages
> > which don't build cleanly with it at the moment.
> >
> > So if you'd use the stable glibc it would build fine. There is no need
> > to mark procmail in any way. ~x86 should be able to apply patches on
> > their own, or wait until the patch arrives in tree.
>
> Having run ~x86 since starting to build this install... how big of a
> problem would it be to return to stable?

Much more work than it's worth. It's easier to reinstall.

You run into issues like baselayout. Latest unstable is 2.0.1, latest stable 
is 1.12.11.1. When you emerged baselayout, it either created a whole whack of 
new files and included openrc, or upgraded the existing baselayout-1 stuff to 
baselayout-2 spec.

Either way, the ebuild does not know how to go back down one version. 
baselayout affects a huge number of things, not the least of which is how to 
load lvm and soft raid modules. I've never attempted this change myself, and 
am not likely too either - it's way too easy to predict the resulting mess.

There was a recent thread on this, and the OP eventually decided to write a 
script that listed every package he had and copy this to package.mask (with 
">" in front of course), then just wait for everything in stable to catch up.

Your other option is to locate problematic packages individually and put just 
those into package.mask - pegging them at known working versions. 

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com