On Friday 11 November 2005 22:53, Brian Harring wrote: > Hola, > > Short version is that via bug 112082 plus glibc upstream doing > something stupid, a lovely bug has reared it's head. Basically, > users upgrading from glibc-2.3.5.200*.ebuild have libc.so-2.3.90.so, > and glibc-2.3.6.ebuild has libc.so-2.3.6.so . > > ldconfig views 2.3.90 as greater then 2.3.6; during merge, portage > views 2.3.5.200* -> 2.3.6 as an upgrade, and triggers an ldconfig > call. Said call, and said upstream weird lib versioning results in > ld.so.6 being reset from libc-2.3.6.so to libc-2.3.90.so , which > obviously gets a bit screwed up when unmerge comes around and yanks > the lib. > > Az split off a patch for it (after lots of fun digging) to correct it; > we're going to need a rc8 covering this one offhand, since it's > invalid linking in certain cases. > > Thoughts/complaints/issues/further testing?
Short answer: No. Long answer: This is not a regression; you'll find the same problem in stable. It's an area where a slight error can break lots of things that are even slightly non-standard. This case where the bug is occurring is very non-standard and has not cropped up before (or at least hasn't been brought to anybody's attention) in the time since I (and you) have been with the project. Lastly, 2.3.5.200* is/was hard masked. My preference would be to put the patch into trunk and release .54_pre1 within the next 24 hours. -- Jason Stubbs -- [email protected] mailing list
