Ühel kenal päeval, E, 18.04.2016 kell 12:38, kirjutas Mike Frysinger: > On 16 Apr 2016 09:23, Patrick Lauer wrote: > > So why on earth are we applying a random patch that upstream is not > > using > > not everyone uses glibc, and glibc *is* moving in this > direction. Gentoo > is simply accelerating the change ... otherwise glibc will take > longer to > do the actual migration.
You don't need to break everyone's ~arch for dubious glibc benefits, which could be done by a p.masked version and a tinderbox run. I am not your tinderbox dummy having to waste time on this to maintain my own ~arch stuff. > packages failing to build under glibc already > fail to build in other environments. That is simply not true, at least not to the extent you make it sound. We have FreeBSD prefix ourselves seemingly building just fine, X.org stuff build everywhere UNTIL you apply this currently gentoo specific patch, etc. > > *and* unleashing it on ~arch without any of the usual precautions > > like masking the package until some of the issues have been smoked > > out? > > it was masked for a while, some bugs were fixed, but no new ones were > really being found. so in the absence of data showing a problem, > unmasking is normal. > -mike Why are all the concerns raised at e.g https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94231 not resolved then? Over there you even told you won't be including this patch in Gentoo, but get it trickled in from upstream once they judge it as good to go. Instead you go ahead and unmask this without removing the gentoo specific sysmacros header removal, knowing FULLY WELL that you break ~arch for a lot of things (just even based on that libdrm bug, merely breaking every single ~arch gentoo GUI installation in existence), as any simple test would show you, or a tinderbox run would blow up immediately. This is glibc ~arch here, not some little independent tool or not widely used library where ~arch breakage is acceptable. If you wanted to flush out packages breaking, you could simply locally compiled stuff and immediately see a ton of stuff, asked someone to do a tinderbox run, or whatever. Yet it doesn't help much, because upstreams can be resisting to changing anything, because the documentation in man-pages tells them they are doing everything correctly already. Even todays git of man-pages tells that including sys/types.h is sufficient and the correct thing to do to get makedev/major/minor. You are breaking this with a Gentoo specific patch, this is really a NO-NO. I really appreciate your system packages gruntwork, but please please start to consider with others and be a little bit more conservative about such stuff for ~arch, especially when it's Gentoo specific. A heavily disgruntled Gentoo ~arch maintainer unable to do his job due to others adding breakages he shouldn't care about, Mart Raudsepp
