Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Friday, September 23, 2011 17:44:50 Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2 > packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those > revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's > zlib incompatible with upstream. the defines in question are internal to zlib. packages relying on them are broken, plain and simple. > As a result, a lot of packages stopped building. the *only* code that broke was code that was copied out of the zlib tree and directly imported into other projects -- minizip. because the code was designed to be compiled & linked as part of the zlib project, it uses internal zlib defines. projects copying the code into their own tree and not cleaning things up made a mistake. for many, this is a direct violation of Gentoo policy and they should be fixed to use the minizip code that zlib exports. for the rest that modify the code heavily, they should stop using the internal defines since their own code base doesn't support pre-ansi C compilers. > Bug reports for broken packages come in and then are being > modified to fit Gentoo's zlib. and those fixes can be sent to the respective upstreams > Breaking compatibility with upstream zlib also means that non-portage > software, the ones I install with "./configure --prefix=$HOME/usr && > make install", also won't build. send the fix to the upstream maintainer > It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that > deals with it was locked from public view: because you keep presenting the same flawed ideas and ignore the responses. in fact, all of the answers i posted above i already posted to the bug. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Friday, September 23, 2011 18:02:50 Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that > > > > deals with it was locked from public view: > >https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179 > > Is there any good reason why this bug is dev-only? Going over the contents > I dont see any. it was purely to keep people from continuing to whine with circular logic. if bugzilla had a way to temporarily lock comments, i would have used that. > (And we've been bickering in far worse ways on public bugs.) that's not justification to enable further misbehavior. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Friday, September 23, 2011 19:30:15 Alec Warner wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Andreas K. Huettel > > > > wrote: > >> Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him > >> after setting the group restriction. > > > > That's not a very nice thing to do. > > I un-hide the bug. If you find that people are misbehaving on bugzilla > you should let userrel know and we will take necessary action. it was meant as a temporary solution and once people went elsewhere, i'd just unlock it. didn't feel like hassling userrel over a minor issue. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Andreas K. Huettel > wrote: >> Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him >> after >> setting the group restriction. >> > > That's not a very nice thing to do. I un-hide the bug. If you find that people are misbehaving on bugzilla you should let userrel know and we will take necessary action. -A > > However, Nikos didn't behave nicely either, so I don't quite blame > vapier for his actions. > > -- > ~Nirbheek Chauhan > > Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team > >
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2 > packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those > revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's zlib > incompatible with upstream. As a result, a lot of packages stopped > building. Bug reports for broken packages come in and then are being > modified to fit Gentoo's zlib. > > Breaking compatibility with upstream zlib also means that non-portage > software, the ones I install with "./configure --prefix=$HOME/usr && make > install", also won't build. > > It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that deals > with it was locked from public view: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179 > > Is there a plan for this, or will we have to live with what is essentially > an incompatible Gentoo fork of zlib? It seemed to me like this was a silly problem from the outset. vapier did arguably the right thing, and if that means exposing some broken software, fine. We handle plenty of breakage worse than this, but I understand that it can be inconvenient. However, you completely lost any support when you said > Yes, bad idea. But it's in my liberty to write code however I see fit. That just makes me want to slap you. I'll echo what vapier said in response: it's absolutely your prerogative to do whatever you want, but it's not our responsibility to make sure that it works in Gentoo. > It's a bad call. You've made plenty of those lately. This is just another one. > IMO, you don't have the skills and insight to mess with this stuff. So when > you > try, breakage happens. I hope you retire soon. Are you kidding me? Grow up.
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/23/2011 11:18 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > On Freitag 23 September 2011 23:54:09 Markos Chandras wrote: >> >> Why are you discussing this in the -dev ML since there is already >> an open bug about this? This is clearly a problem(if any) with the >> zlib packages + maintainer. We ( as individual devs ) can't do >> much. If you want to push this further, I'd suggest you to CC qa@ >> on the bug or contact them directly. > > Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed > him after setting the group restriction. > Sorry I did not notice that. That is a very strange behaviour indeed - -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOfQiRAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCrYsQAKfKwcNvc4rw0cA/iQQgjRVj uKcacVzEZIMyVbrByqfavtKS46GB8LM/5IdsaQbMTrCrmaqfSbMulYqPqC01erf0 THynRiauMxl1OaipycWxdPDpBXIj1boSkrkFbGsJCmyChSX8Sabytxbh459QMmZE vHz1CMImR0lruHcInWcNnlzQxmZkROCcKoCq85fMx1XEJEQ+XXn91ZD+FUthhLQi EezRAKpFNN6ufwlhoWhpoRc/b6nLUkXVDbP1HKtl6FR4pOBOUZ2SMxPqlr5pS0hl mTC00MDM5ncSwSYyhxYl4JeRAR2/RpsqXHrpNw+Tb2PVEdWTs5svhBo9sUQaAiyJ R/PCqfHL+HeWjcN9rU+AHeQxhIX0wRFcLiXS3MrqpUOOzZj56tWGO1nNCpLu2g4G Rn47djH3ooIDMrMidpB/H+T21sDc+JFZ+GeGEI12GzOI3n52X5/14W8rB9VipMR2 CeP84zmb/ibVZKodL1pWbRHByGDl6OhbnYH2dLCkHGJ1pDqLpIviwK9oGCHfgjx6 gjA4r1WQ/ommhZrMIiOF1d03DcMqLkkorSSOvFwmpVYeJM8gHKsN/DFIbsPmvLr3 dzmuHv6irgnUWPbcdQf5/OdQy7xG4X9aSiBIrwzKyB/dMPbcoUhBZ0+ZNwgPbtjQ ADW9iwzdGYCXiQ7ADdac =gNbC -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him after > setting the group restriction. > That's not a very nice thing to do. However, Nikos didn't behave nicely either, so I don't quite blame vapier for his actions. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
On Freitag 23 September 2011 23:54:09 Markos Chandras wrote: > > Why are you discussing this in the -dev ML since there is already an > open bug about this? This is clearly a problem(if any) with the zlib > packages + maintainer. We ( as individual devs ) can't do much. If you > want to push this further, I'd suggest you to CC qa@ on the bug or > contact them directly. Because he cannot do this; the bug is dev-only now and Mike un-cc'ed him after setting the group restriction. -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
> It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that > deals with it was locked from public view: > >https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179 Is there any good reason why this bug is dev-only? Going over the contents I dont see any. (And we've been bickering in far worse ways on public bugs.) We will not hide problems We will keep our bug report database open for public view at all times; reports that users file online will immediately become visible to others. Exceptions are made when we receive security-related or developer relations information with the request not to publicize before a certain deadline. http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/23/2011 10:44 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and > -r2 packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed > those revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making > Gentoo's zlib incompatible with upstream. As a result, a lot of > packages stopped building. Bug reports for broken packages come in > and then are being modified to fit Gentoo's zlib. > > Breaking compatibility with upstream zlib also means that > non-portage software, the ones I install with "./configure > --prefix=$HOME/usr && make install", also won't build. > > It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that > deals with it was locked from public view: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179 > > Is there a plan for this, or will we have to live with what is > essentially an incompatible Gentoo fork of zlib? > > Why are you discussing this in the -dev ML since there is already an open bug about this? This is clearly a problem(if any) with the zlib packages + maintainer. We ( as individual devs ) can't do much. If you want to push this further, I'd suggest you to CC qa@ on the bug or contact them directly. - -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOfQABAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCI20P/3uLDPIWQ1UdVFZxBfS+C9xe Wc9RvmAt9TlNuBltigs/XnQqfZCg9xIF79AobDuKg1PD8YlUvG/bnHdeXazPiMvN o4IqBi0Rdc+jJ1eCXlxsPiUndpGXbIOzCsANRDHW8xwF6Au8/odhcEADtcZ8BFX2 C/SW4/UOg+w8VAmcRu85JOZlnuGvSbCCKFpCOM4/BMR7k/fWnWXqFsKQfrUvi8vO Hu4u4wzTRjPnLVVvmUG8CTH+mXGI+BatAMQ3hD359AV/ya6wr5c+xTon6XO9oYhg smpdx8IbLkJR3YCfBcr6BvNX4T3mTG8FyjL2YSuxdYWjB3Z5kcg3mdvnc74kXemc tfqmrI1MG1ZtnQXeOQ2+kX+EKvdxEOLEiALZliZ3lZYeXV4uZqJOh9zdE84K5w71 Ptukbkx59cDtXRyAR/UCUs6ZH3edbXFBxQZUk/qRz6SFL3qha2LYgdLNyu91lrzB UFztH35k6khf+5nY4eFIKQVIqbBREt5dGKMSN1l0tBSCvzehqbF9VthF0EQPrjVr DaTEtOTLSvCCX46F6uHgN5fxSsTACOqZVBEGlOAS4wE56o16CAE2ZPGlUgvhx+Hw 4L6oPhfCk3kIedOyNCBEczlCRyO6wBTM7SLOwDJc9mQcKZ99A+UbLcT5LLAgH8Vu 58a3jNtXeOFQlFdQflW1 =M4je -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] zlib breakage
I believe something needs to be done with the zlib-1.2.5.1-r1 and -r2 packages currently in the tree. The maintainer of zlib pushed those revisions with a patch that alters macro identifiers, making Gentoo's zlib incompatible with upstream. As a result, a lot of packages stopped building. Bug reports for broken packages come in and then are being modified to fit Gentoo's zlib. Breaking compatibility with upstream zlib also means that non-portage software, the ones I install with "./configure --prefix=$HOME/usr && make install", also won't build. It's a mess right now and it just doesn't look right. The bug that deals with it was locked from public view: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383179 Is there a plan for this, or will we have to live with what is essentially an incompatible Gentoo fork of zlib?
