Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Donnie Berkholz wrote: Jakub Moc wrote: Olivier Crete wrote: Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK... There's a tracker bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112675 and below is the most recent list from spyderous I was able to find (no idea how much relevant it still is). http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/broken_modular/broken_modular.txt.20060315 I can probably generate one tonight. Need to dig up the scripts, and I've got an emerge -e world running in the background. Thanks, Donnie Donnie, pingy! ;) Just a friendly reminder to run the script again, so that we can do a last attempt on fixing the remaining stuff before resorting to more drastic solutions... Thanks. ;) -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Jakub Moc wrote: Donnie, pingy! ;) Just a friendly reminder to run the script again, so that we can do a last attempt on fixing the remaining stuff before resorting to more drastic solutions... Yeah, it's on my list, but I've got family here all weekend so no time to work on stuff. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
@4u wrote: After posting and closing the bug report: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135870 Jakub Moc noticed that the current =virtual/x11-7.0 ebuild misses its task and creates trouble. Indeed. To re-iterate here, I'll basically re-paste what I've said on the bug, so that people don't have to jump to bugs.g.o.: =virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for modular X. The side effect is that dependencies like X? ( || ( foo bar baz ) virtual/x11 ) fail once virtual/x11 gets emerged by one of those broken ebuilds, because the dependency is already satisfied by virtual/x11. If that virtual doesn't depend on either of foo bar baz, then the dependency doesn't get emerged and a perfectly valid ebuild without any missing dependencies fails. For example: This ebuild behaves partly like a ordinary meta build and installs imake. You need imake (more correctly xmfmk) to install tightvnc. Yeah, as it is now, it's essentially a dumpspace for redundant dependencies that are already stated in ebuilds fixed for modular X, but that frequently don't get installed b/c of the problem described above. We are mis-using a 'new style' virtual to produce yet another metabuild that serves the only purpose - to hide borkage. For that reason I want to request the deletion of virtual/x11-7.0 and that at least some dependencies of virtual/x11 are moved to =x11-base/xorg-x11-7.0 where these dependencies belong to IMHO. xorg-x11 is a meta ebuild. Each ebuild should state its own dependencies. x11-base/xorg-x11 is a metabuild for users' convenience, which should produce a pretty full-featured X server install, but nothing more. It's not a dumpspace for whatever redundant dependencies either. So - IMHO we should stop shoving the real breakage under the carpet, if ebuilds are not ported for modular X, they are broken and should be fixed. If noone cares to fix them enough for some time, they'll probably need to be package.masked and subsequently removed from the tree. Until then, they'll bomb out, because they are broken, that's a perfectly expected behaviour... What we are instead doing now, is hiding the breakage by misusing virtual/x11-7 to emerge most frequently missing deps, which is bloating more and more, as more and more not broken ebuilds are hit by the redundant virtual. Not good, really. Some examples of needless borkage include: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=123071 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=127617 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128163 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128353 http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128354 (plus numerous duplicates). While the above bugs are marked fixed, they won't be really fixed until =virtual/x11-7 goes to /dev/null and stops causing more harm than good. Sorry for a long post, but this problem really needs to be addressed. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Jakub Moc wrote: =virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for modular X. I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow unported ebuilds to break. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Donnie Berkholz wrote: Jakub Moc wrote: =virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for modular X. I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow unported ebuilds to break. Thanks, Donnie Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a great idea to fix the unported ebuilds. Would it be possible to mark virtual/x11-7 as deprecated (using enotice/ewarn or similar), in order to get people to port any build relying on it to modular X? The way I see it, once virtual/x11-7 has been deprecated for a while (6 months to a year) and most popular packages have been ported to modular X, virtual/x11-7 and any packages still relying on it could be given Last Rites. --Arek -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Arek (James Potts) wrote: Donnie Berkholz wrote: =virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for modular X. I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow unported ebuilds to break. Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a great idea to fix the unported ebuilds. Would it be possible to mark virtual/x11-7 as deprecated (using enotice/ewarn or similar), in order to get people to port any build relying on it to modular X? The way I see it, once virtual/x11-7 has been deprecated for a while (6 months to a year) and most popular packages have been ported to modular X, virtual/x11-7 and any packages still relying on it could be given Last Rites. Hmm, I don't think so... There's been a plenty of time to do this when modular X has been package.masked, the remaining unported stuff didn't get much further even after it's been unmasked. There's been a (debatable) repoman check, which has been too annoying so devs nuked it for themselves, now it's non-fatal warning again (which is mostly being ignored). S - I'd pretty much say until the real breakage is *visible* and users start to scream - not much will change. Making it visible could also help us differentiate between used and used stuff. If there's something unported and you get no bug, then probably noone uses the thing, nothing depends on it and it can be punted from the tree. On a side note, this virtual also hides potential bugs in ebuilds that already have been ported, you can miss dependencies there if you have already them emerged b/c of the virtual. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
On Wed, 2006-07-06 at 18:41 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: Arek (James Potts) wrote: Donnie Berkholz wrote: =virtual/x11-7 is hiding breakage in ebuilds that are not ported for modular X. I couldn't agree more, but I was forced to add this rather than allow unported ebuilds to break. Hmmm...Looks to me like it would be a great idea to fix the unported ebuilds. Would it be possible to mark virtual/x11-7 as deprecated (using enotice/ewarn or similar), in order to get people to port any build relying on it to modular X? The way I see it, once virtual/x11-7 has been deprecated for a while (6 months to a year) and most popular packages have been ported to modular X, virtual/x11-7 and any packages still relying on it could be given Last Rites. Hmm, I don't think so... There's been a plenty of time to do this when modular X has been package.masked, the remaining unported stuff didn't get much further even after it's been unmasked. There's been a (debatable) repoman check, which has been too annoying so devs nuked it for themselves, now it's non-fatal warning again (which is mostly being ignored). S - I'd pretty much say until the real breakage is *visible* and users start to scream - not much will change. Making it visible could also help us differentiate between used and used stuff. If there's something unported and you get no bug, then probably noone uses the thing, nothing depends on it and it can be punted from the tree. Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. -- Olivier Crête [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 05:26 +0930, Raymond Lewis Rebbeck wrote: Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. games-roguelike/slashem is one package that I know of. It should have very similar dependencies to nethack. It is also already masked. We'll update it once we get a proper solution to the security bug that caused it to be masked. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Olivier Crete wrote: Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK... There's a tracker bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112675 and below is the most recent list from spyderous I was able to find (no idea how much relevant it still is). http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/broken_modular/broken_modular.txt.20060315 -- jakub signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds
Jakub Moc wrote: Olivier Crete wrote: Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. Hmmm, not a up2date one, AFAIK... There's a tracker bug http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112675 and below is the most recent list from spyderous I was able to find (no idea how much relevant it still is). http://dev.gentoo.org/~spyderous/broken_modular/broken_modular.txt.20060315 I can probably generate one tonight. Need to dig up the scripts, and I've got an emerge -e world running in the background. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
