Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On 03/11/19 21:37, Michał Górny wrote: > On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 15:26 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: >> >> You being a qa member doesn't have a lot to do with this mgorny. you >> know there was no official policy when I posted this, and as far as I >> know there is not one now. >> > That is a really poor argument. Something that's respected for 10+ > years and reported as QA violation is a standing policy as far as I'm > concerned. Just because it isn't backed by a formally stamped policy > (at least as far as we know -- maybe it was actually stamped somewhere > in the past?) doesn't mean you it's fine for one person to change it ad- > hoc because it stands in his way. > > I should point that I'm very concerned that you're pushing this forward > even though: > > 1) I've objected to the change itself, > > 2) I've pointed out that it's been sent to the wrong mailing list, > and that this explicitly prevents a number of developers from even > knowing that this is happening, > > 3) removing it provides a way for regressions that can have major impact > on users and that involve much effort in reverting that. > > So if I send a revert patch afterwards, and you object, should the patch > be accepted because only one person objected? > Children, please take this off-list ... signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 15:26 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:18:40PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> > On 11/3/19 11:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 11:49 -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> > > > On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > > > Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> > > > > causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
> > > > > ---
> > > > > bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
> > > > > 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > > > > b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > > > > index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
> > > > > --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > > > > +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > > > > @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
> > > > > done
> > > > > [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
> > > > >
> > > > > - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in
> > > > > /lib
> > > > > - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
> > > > > - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
> > > > > - __vecho -ne '\n'
> > > > > - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the /
> > > > > partition"
> > > > > - eqawarn "${f}"
> > > > > - __vecho -ne '\n'
> > > > > - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files
> > > > > (*.la) belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
> > > > > - fi
> > > > > -
> > > > > # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
> > > > > local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
> > > > > for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Merged. Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=498900e5e51460502d8271f409a4c614a021613b
> > > >
> > >
> > > Please revert this. I should point out that this has been vetoed
> > > by a QA member, and is currently subject to QA vote. Therefore, I
> > > believe you shouldn't be making rash decisions based on patches
> > > submitted by a single developer. Especially given that so far nobody
> > > else has voiced his opinion either way, so it's 1:1.
>
> You being a qa member doesn't have a lot to do with this mgorny. you
> know there was no official policy when I posted this, and as far as I
> know there is not one now.
>
That is a really poor argument. Something that's respected for 10+
years and reported as QA violation is a standing policy as far as I'm
concerned. Just because it isn't backed by a formally stamped policy
(at least as far as we know -- maybe it was actually stamped somewhere
in the past?) doesn't mean you it's fine for one person to change it ad-
hoc because it stands in his way.
I should point that I'm very concerned that you're pushing this forward
even though:
1) I've objected to the change itself,
2) I've pointed out that it's been sent to the wrong mailing list,
and that this explicitly prevents a number of developers from even
knowing that this is happening,
3) removing it provides a way for regressions that can have major impact
on users and that involve much effort in reverting that.
So if I send a revert patch afterwards, and you object, should the patch
be accepted because only one person objected?
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:18:40PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 11/3/19 11:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 11:49 -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> >> On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> >>> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> >>> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
> >>> ---
> >>> bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
> >>> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> >>> b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> >>> index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
> >>> --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> >>> +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> >>> @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
> >>> done
> >>> [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
> >>>
> >>> - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib
> >>> - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
> >>> - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
> >>> - __vecho -ne '\n'
> >>> - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition"
> >>> - eqawarn "${f}"
> >>> - __vecho -ne '\n'
> >>> - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la)
> >>> belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
> >>> - fi
> >>> -
> >>> # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
> >>> local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
> >>> for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
> >>>
> >>
> >> Merged. Thanks!
> >>
> >> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=498900e5e51460502d8271f409a4c614a021613b
> >>
> >
> > Please revert this. I should point out that this has been vetoed
> > by a QA member, and is currently subject to QA vote. Therefore, I
> > believe you shouldn't be making rash decisions based on patches
> > submitted by a single developer. Especially given that so far nobody
> > else has voiced his opinion either way, so it's 1:1.
You being a qa member doesn't have a lot to do with this mgorny. you
know there was no official policy when I posted this, and as far as I
know there is not one now.
William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On 11/3/19 12:32 PM, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
>> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
>> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
>> ---
>> bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
>> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>> b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>> index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
>> --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>> +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>> @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
>> done
>> [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
>>
>> -# Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib
>> -f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
>> -if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
>> -__vecho -ne '\n'
>> -eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition"
>> -eqawarn "${f}"
>> -__vecho -ne '\n'
>> -die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la)
>> belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
>> -fi
>> -
>> # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
>> local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
>> for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
>>
>
> If we merge this patch then we need to make sure that we fix up the
> later code which currently assumes that *.{a,la} may only exist under
> /usr/lib* directories.
>
We should also review the assertion that comes just before, involving
/usr/lib*/*.a and gen_usr_ldscript.
--
Thanks,
Zac
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
>
> Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
> ---
> bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
> --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
> done
> [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
>
> - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib
> - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
> - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
> - __vecho -ne '\n'
> - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition"
> - eqawarn "${f}"
> - __vecho -ne '\n'
> - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la)
> belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
> - fi
> -
> # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
> local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
> for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
>
If we merge this patch then we need to make sure that we fix up the
later code which currently assumes that *.{a,la} may only exist under
/usr/lib* directories.
--
Thanks,
Zac
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On 11/3/19 11:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 11:49 -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
>> On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
>>> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
>>> ---
>>> bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
>>> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>>> b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>>> index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
>>> --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>>> +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
>>> @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
>>> done
>>> [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
>>>
>>> - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib
>>> - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
>>> - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
>>> - __vecho -ne '\n'
>>> - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition"
>>> - eqawarn "${f}"
>>> - __vecho -ne '\n'
>>> - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la)
>>> belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
>>> - fi
>>> -
>>> # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
>>> local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
>>> for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
>>>
>>
>> Merged. Thanks!
>>
>> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=498900e5e51460502d8271f409a4c614a021613b
>>
>
> Please revert this. I should point out that this has been vetoed
> by a QA member, and is currently subject to QA vote. Therefore, I
> believe you shouldn't be making rash decisions based on patches
> submitted by a single developer. Especially given that so far nobody
> else has voiced his opinion either way, so it's 1:1.
Thanks for the info. Reverted:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=ae2a76261fd7e519bfbb3b8c4b41aa511d039245
--
Thanks,
Zac
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On Sun, 2019-11-03 at 11:49 -0800, Zac Medico wrote:
> On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> > causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
> > ---
> > bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
> > 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
> > --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> > @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
> > done
> > [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
> >
> > - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib
> > - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
> > - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
> > - __vecho -ne '\n'
> > - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition"
> > - eqawarn "${f}"
> > - __vecho -ne '\n'
> > - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la)
> > belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
> > - fi
> > -
> > # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
> > local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
> > for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
> >
>
> Merged. Thanks!
>
> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=498900e5e51460502d8271f409a4c614a021613b
>
Please revert this. I should point out that this has been vetoed
by a QA member, and is currently subject to QA vote. Therefore, I
believe you shouldn't be making rash decisions based on patches
submitted by a single developer. Especially given that so far nobody
else has voiced his opinion either way, so it's 1:1.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On 10/27/19 10:40 AM, William Hubbs wrote:
> Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this
> causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds.
>
> Signed-off-by: William Hubbs
> ---
> bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries | 10 --
> 1 file changed, 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> index d1d2c4fdd..e59369bf6 100644
> --- a/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> +++ b/bin/install-qa-check.d/80libraries
> @@ -152,16 +152,6 @@ lib_check() {
> done
> [[ ${abort} == "yes" ]] && die "add those ldscripts"
>
> - # Make sure people don't store libtool files or static libs in /lib
> - f=$(ls "${ED%/}"/lib*/*.{a,la} 2>/dev/null)
> - if [[ -n ${f} ]] ; then
> - __vecho -ne '\n'
> - eqawarn "QA Notice: Excessive files found in the / partition"
> - eqawarn "${f}"
> - __vecho -ne '\n'
> - die "static archives (*.a) and libtool library files (*.la)
> belong in /usr/lib*, not /lib*"
> - fi
> -
> # Verify that the libtool files don't contain bogus $D entries.
> local abort=no gentoo_bug=no always_overflow=no
> for a in "${ED%/}"/usr/lib*/*.la ; do
>
Merged. Thanks!
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/portage.git/commit/?id=498900e5e51460502d8271f409a4c614a021613b
--
Thanks,
Zac
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] install-qa-check.d: remove check that bans libtool files and static libs from /
On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 12:40:07PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: > Most upstreams and build systems do not make this distinction, so this > causes unnecessary hacks in ebuilds. I spoke with the qa lead about this as you suggested, and he doesn't feel that he needs to ack this from a qa standpoint. He agrees with me that there isn't an official qa policy keeping this in place. So, we are back to this being a portage issue. Thanks, William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
