Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] About how to make compilation think some files are missing
El sáb, 12-02-2011 a las 15:43 -0800, Zac Medico escribió: On 02/12/2011 07:50 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: This comes from glitz removal (bug #330397), as soon as cairo-1.10 gets stabilized, depclean will try to remove glitz, but removing glitz will break a lot of apps, needing to rebuild them and, until then, having a partially broken system. I then thought on running revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 BEFORE removing glitz (to prevent breakage), but later I remembered it wouldn't work as rebuilt packages would link again against libglitz-glx.so.1. Then, my idea would the following: Would be nice if I could tell portage to make compilation think libglitz-glx.so.1 is not present in real system (maybe sandbox could prevent its readability inside build environment), and then, I could run revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 before removing glitz and affected apps would not link to it, allowing me to safely remove glitz later without having had a broken system at any time. What do you think? Thanks Ideally, the build system(s) involved would have options to explicitly disable linking against the deprecated library. Barring that possibility, something like your sandbox idea seems like the second-best solution. On par with the the sandbox idea would be to migrate the deprecated library to a directory which is not included in the default library search path, and to use a global LD_LIBRARY_PATH setting so that your apps can find it until they are rebuilt. Then you could execute your rebuilds in an environment with a modified LD_LIBRARY_PATH value that excludes the path of the deprecated library. Didn't think about that last LD_LIBRARY_PATH option, looks easier for now. Thanks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-portage-dev] About how to make compilation think some files are missing
This comes from glitz removal (bug #330397), as soon as cairo-1.10 gets stabilized, depclean will try to remove glitz, but removing glitz will break a lot of apps, needing to rebuild them and, until then, having a partially broken system. I then thought on running revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 BEFORE removing glitz (to prevent breakage), but later I remembered it wouldn't work as rebuilt packages would link again against libglitz-glx.so.1. Then, my idea would the following: Would be nice if I could tell portage to make compilation think libglitz-glx.so.1 is not present in real system (maybe sandbox could prevent its readability inside build environment), and then, I could run revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 before removing glitz and affected apps would not link to it, allowing me to safely remove glitz later without having had a broken system at any time. What do you think? Thanks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] About how to make compilation think some files are missing
Dne 12.2.2011 16:50, Pacho Ramos napsal(a): Then, my idea would the following: Would be nice if I could tell portage to make compilation think libglitz-glx.so.1 is not present in real system (maybe sandbox could prevent its readability inside build environment), and then, I could run revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 before removing glitz and affected apps would not link to it, allowing me to safely remove glitz later without having had a broken system at any time. What do you think? Thanks I think you want to update to portage-2.2 (you need to unmask it manually). It does exactly what you want in this case. Regards, Martin Doucha
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] About how to make compilation think some files are missing
El sáb, 12-02-2011 a las 18:22 +0100, Martin Doucha escribió: Dne 12.2.2011 16:50, Pacho Ramos napsal(a): Then, my idea would the following: Would be nice if I could tell portage to make compilation think libglitz-glx.so.1 is not present in real system (maybe sandbox could prevent its readability inside build environment), and then, I could run revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 before removing glitz and affected apps would not link to it, allowing me to safely remove glitz later without having had a broken system at any time. What do you think? Thanks I think you want to update to portage-2.2 (you need to unmask it manually). It does exactly what you want in this case. Regards, Martin Doucha I am not sure if portage-2.2 would also cover this case: in this example, the problem appears because of people uninstalling *intentionally* media-libs/glitz (as it's no longer needed) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] About how to make compilation think some files are missing
On 02/12/2011 07:50 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: This comes from glitz removal (bug #330397), as soon as cairo-1.10 gets stabilized, depclean will try to remove glitz, but removing glitz will break a lot of apps, needing to rebuild them and, until then, having a partially broken system. I then thought on running revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 BEFORE removing glitz (to prevent breakage), but later I remembered it wouldn't work as rebuilt packages would link again against libglitz-glx.so.1. Then, my idea would the following: Would be nice if I could tell portage to make compilation think libglitz-glx.so.1 is not present in real system (maybe sandbox could prevent its readability inside build environment), and then, I could run revdep-rebuild --library libglitz-glx.so.1 before removing glitz and affected apps would not link to it, allowing me to safely remove glitz later without having had a broken system at any time. What do you think? Thanks Ideally, the build system(s) involved would have options to explicitly disable linking against the deprecated library. Barring that possibility, something like your sandbox idea seems like the second-best solution. On par with the the sandbox idea would be to migrate the deprecated library to a directory which is not included in the default library search path, and to use a global LD_LIBRARY_PATH setting so that your apps can find it until they are rebuilt. Then you could execute your rebuilds in an environment with a modified LD_LIBRARY_PATH value that excludes the path of the deprecated library. -- Thanks, Zac
