Hello, We -- the Python team -- would like to add the first masks to the new profiles. As a test target, I have chosen the python_targets_pypy1_9 flag.
I have prepared and committed the necessary changes to my CVS checkout [1]. I would appreciate if you could review them and tell me if they are done correctly. The idea is that: 1) pypy1_9 is masked globally -- for old profiles and unsupported arches, 2) pypy1_9 is unmasked for the new profiles in supported arches, 3) pypy1_9 is stable-masked for the new profiles in supported arches. In order to test, I have added pypy1_9 to PYTHON_COMPAT in app-portage/flaggie-0.2-r2 amd64&x86-stable ebuild. Sadly, it doesn't seem to work but I believe it is a bug in repoman. The interesting thing is that adding the stable-mask makes the situation even worse. When testing without it, repoman complains about non-keyworded pypy:1.9: dependency.bad 36 app-portage/flaggie/flaggie-0.2-r2.ebuild: DEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/10.0) ['dev-python/pypy:1.9'] When running with pypy1_9 flag stable-masked, it complains about python-exec flags as well: dependency.badindev 28 app-portage/flaggie/flaggie-0.2-r2.ebuild: DEPEND: amd64(default/linux/amd64/13.0) ['dev-python/python-exec[python_targets_python2_6?,python_targets_python2_7?,python_targets_python3_1?,python_targets_python3_2?,python_targets_pypy1_8?,python_targets_pypy1_9?,-python_single_target_python2_6(-),-python_single_target_python2_7(-),-python_single_target_python3_1(-),-python_single_target_python3_2(-),-python_single_target_pypy1_8(-),-python_single_target_pypy1_9(-)]', 'dev-python/pypy:1.9'] Long output short, it still complains about pypy:1.9 but seems also to notice that pypy1_9 was masked in python-exec. But it is also masked in the ebuild in question, therefore it shouldn't complain… [1]:https://bitbucket.org/mgorny/gx86-working-tree/commits/54ec3860de -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
