| 1 |
Daniel Pielmeier writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> 2009/11/4 Alex Schuster <wonko@×××××××××.org>: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> > * In order to avoid breakage of link level dependencies, one or more |
| 6 |
> > * packages will not be removed. This can be solved by rebuilding the |
| 7 |
> > * packages that pulled them in. |
| 8 |
> > * |
| 9 |
> > * dev-libs/elfutils-0.131-r2 pulled in by: |
| 10 |
> > * dev-util/ddd-3.3.12-r1 needs libelf.so.1 |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Newer versions of portage print this message if a package is about to |
| 13 |
> be removed because there is no ebuild dependency from all other |
| 14 |
> installed packages, but it is still needed because other packages link |
| 15 |
> to it automagically. This seems to be the case here, ddd automagically |
| 16 |
> links to elfutils depending on whether it is available or not, instead |
| 17 |
> of being controlled by the ebuild via use flag. So ddd links against |
| 18 |
> elfutils and portage does not know about it. In this case the |
| 19 |
> suggestion of rebuilding the packages does not work. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> With older portage versions elfutils is removed and the dependency is |
| 22 |
> ignored. Revdep-rebuild will complain about ddd linking against |
| 23 |
> elfutils which is not available anymore and then rebuild ddd which |
| 24 |
> will result in ddd not linking against elfutils anymore. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I wonder what is better? Now no breakage happens, which is fine, but the |
| 27 |
with old portage the breakage would be solved completely after revdep- |
| 28 |
rebuild. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> > Should some bugs be filed? And if so, should they go: |
| 31 |
> > - To the ebuild maintainers? But they probably cannot do much about |
| 32 |
> > it, apart from patching the package's autoconf stuff. |
| 33 |
> > - To upstream? Well, would they consider this this a bug at all, or a |
| 34 |
> > mere problem with Gentoo's special build system, that wants to know |
| 35 |
> > all the dependencies? |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> If ddd really links automagically against elfutils, you should file a |
| 38 |
> Gentoo bug about ddd which needs it's autotools fixed. To save the |
| 39 |
> Gentoo developers some time you can also file an upstream bug and add |
| 40 |
> a reference to it in the Gentoo bug report. If upstream cares about |
| 41 |
> automagic dependencies is another story, in Gentoo it is considered a |
| 42 |
> bug. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Okay, I did so. |
| 45 |
https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?27945 |
| 46 |
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=291972 |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Wonko |
Archives