On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:52:19 -0800 Patrick McLean <[email protected]> wrote:
I will push the attached version with zmedico's change on Friday unless
there are objections (I have addressed all the feedback so far AFAIK).
> Given glibc upstream's tentative plans to remove libcrypt [1], I think
> we should start working out the kinks well in advance. Toolchain has
> already added a package.use.force-ed "crypt" USE flag to
> sys-libs/glibc-2.30-r2 [2]. The main alternative out there is libxcrypt,
> which I have recently bumped and added a package.use.mask-ed "system"
> USE flag to make it provide the "system" version of libcrypt.so.
>
> To give us time to work out dependencies in advance, I would like to
> propose a virtual to provide libcrypt.so, and we can gradually update
> all users of libcrypt to {R,}DEPEND on this virtual.
>
> Maybe once this is in place and the obvious/common packages are
> updated, we could request a tinderbox run to flush out what was missed.
>
>
> [1]
> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=NEWS;h=50479f17c9a3a5ef074dafa3f23aca954b82bd6a;hb=HEAD#l768
> [2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/699422
libcrypt-0.ebuild
Description: Binary data
