Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 09:52:38 -0800, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> >> [ebuild U  ] app-vim/gentoo-syntax-20170225 [20160530]
> >> [ebuild U ~] app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]  
> >
> > Because vim-8.0.0386 is stable and, presumably, the vim and gvim
> > versions must match. I would suggest filing a stabilisation bug for
> > gvim, or  
> 
> Isn't it a bit bizarre that portage tries to force users to go
> unstable on such an exotic package as one of the two major text
> editors?

They're not trying to force anyone, it's simply an oversight.

> I couldn't find the name of the maintainer. Maybe different devs are
> in charge of vim and gvim?

Both are maintained by Gentoo's vim project, v...@gentoo.org. It's in the
metadata.xml file in the ebuild directory. There's probably a tool to
extract that information but eyeballs-1.0 works for me.

> > use emacs...  
> 
> What do[es] the maintainer[s] use?

I would expect the maintainers of any package to use that package...


-- 
Neil Bothwick

The people who are wrapped up in themselves are overdressed.


pgpQcUT_aTDgA.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Marc Joliet]

On Saturday 04 March 2017 10:40:06 Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Marc Joliet  >
> 
> > Does nobody think of searching bugs.gentoo.org anymore?  It was an
> > oversight: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=611386#c6.
> 
> Actually, most plain users won't remember or know that there is such a
> thing. Your post may contribute to improve it. I know I'll remember.
> But that doesn't mean it makes it easy: searching "vim-core-8.0.0386"
> returns zero bugs. Searching "vim-core" returns several entries, one
> of which seems related (if one happens to know that the problem is
> related to gvim to start with, and assuming one is not daunted by a
> reference to "acl"). I'm sure this just means I'm keyword-challenged,
> but I bet I'm not the only one in the universe of plain Gentoo users.

Yeah, searching bugzilla can be a pain sometimes.  I make use of Gentoo's 
gitweb fairly regularly, and it provides a search function.  For example:

https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/log/?qt=grep=vim

will show the commits with "vim" in their summary, and the commit messages 
reference the relevant bug.  Also, security bugs are often also stabilisation 
bugs, which can help in these specific cases.

But yeah, that's just the reality of searching bug databases, I guess :-/ .

> OK, everybody makes mistakes. But reading "use emacs" is bound to
> touch a few cords. Even if it was said with a grain of salt, the fact
> is that updating a stable system after sync'ing is not expected to be
> a surprising experience, at least regarding packages that are not part
> of a huge bundle like KDE.

I agree, for example the ongoing gpgme issue has annoyed quite a bit.  
However, issues like that happen pretty rarely in my personal experience, 
which makes it more tolerable when they do (and it *was* resolved in about 28 
hours, IME <48 hours is normal, often even <24 hours).  And regarding the 
Emacs remark: as somebody who uses both Vim *and* Emacs (though mostly Vim), I 
just don't *care* about the whole Emacs vs. Vi(m) "debate".

> Regards
> 
> Jorge Almeida

Greetings
-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Gevisz]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 16:37:13 + Neil Bothwick  wrote:

> On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 18:21:23 +0200, gevisz wrote:
> 
> > $ eix gvim
> > [I] app-editors/gvim
> >  Available versions:  8.0.0106 ~8.0.0386 ** {acl aqua cscope
> > debug gnome gtk gtk3 lua luajit motif neXt netbeans nls perl python
> > racket ruby selinux session tcl PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4
> > python3_5 python3_6"}
> >  Installed versions:  8.0.0106(05:36:17 PM 12/11/2016)(acl gtk
> > python session -aqua -cscope -debug -gnome -gtk3 -lua -luajit -motif
> > -neXt -netbeans -nls -perl -racket -ruby -selinux -tcl
> > PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4 -python3_5")
> >  Homepage:http://www.vim.org/ https://github.com/vim/vim
> >  Description: GUI version of the Vim text editor
> > 
> > So, in my portage tree currently there is one stable gvim package with
> > version  8.0.0106
> > and one unstable gvim package, with version 8.0.0386.
> > 
> > Why portage force me to unmask an unstable version of the package then?
> > 
> > # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask
> > world --exclude chromiumg
> > 
> > These are the packages that would be merged, in order:  
> 
> > [ebuild U  ] app-editors/vim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
> > PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python3_6)"
> > [ebuild  NS] virtual/libusb-0-r2 [1-r2] ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
> > [ebuild U  ] app-vim/gentoo-syntax-20170225 [20160530]
> > [ebuild U ~] app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]  
> 
> Because vim-8.0.0386 is stable and, presumably, the vim and gvim versions
> must match.

Probably, you are right.

But why to mark vim-8.0.0386 being stable, before gvim-8.0.0386?

> I would suggest filing a stabilisation bug for gvim,

As later replies suggest, it is already done.

My thanks to all who replied.

> or just use emacs...

:)

Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Marc Joliet  >
> Does nobody think of searching bugs.gentoo.org anymore?  It was an oversight:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=611386#c6.
>
Actually, most plain users won't remember or know that there is such a
thing. Your post may contribute to improve it. I know I'll remember.
But that doesn't mean it makes it easy: searching "vim-core-8.0.0386"
returns zero bugs. Searching "vim-core" returns several entries, one
of which seems related (if one happens to know that the problem is
related to gvim to start with, and assuming one is not daunted by a
reference to "acl"). I'm sure this just means I'm keyword-challenged,
but I bet I'm not the only one in the universe of plain Gentoo users.

OK, everybody makes mistakes. But reading "use emacs" is bound to
touch a few cords. Even if it was said with a grain of salt, the fact
is that updating a stable system after sync'ing is not expected to be
a surprising experience, at least regarding packages that are not part
of a huge bundle like KDE.

Regards

Jorge Almeida

Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Marc Joliet]

On Saturday 04 March 2017 09:52:38 Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
> > On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 18:21:23 +0200, gevisz wrote:
> >> So, in my portage tree currently there is one stable gvim package with
> >> version  8.0.0106
> >> and one unstable gvim package, with version 8.0.0386.
> >> 
> >> Why portage force me to unmask an unstable version of the package then?
> >> 
> >> 
> >> [ebuild U  ] app-vim/gentoo-syntax-20170225 [20160530]
> >> [ebuild U ~] app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
> > 
> > Because vim-8.0.0386 is stable and, presumably, the vim and gvim versions
> > must match. I would suggest filing a stabilisation bug for gvim, or
> 
> Isn't it a bit bizarre that portage tries to force users to go
> unstable on such an exotic package as one of the two major text
> editors?
> 
> This can't be good publicity for Gentoo. Yes, I know nobody is after
> that, but still...
> 
> I couldn't find the name of the maintainer. Maybe different devs are
> in charge of vim and gvim?
> 
> just
> 
> > use emacs...
> 
> What do[es] the maintainer[s] use?
> 
> Regards
> 
> Jorge Almeida

Does nobody think of searching bugs.gentoo.org anymore?  It was an oversight:  
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=611386#c6.

-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Jorge Almeida]

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 18:21:23 +0200, gevisz wrote:
>

>> So, in my portage tree currently there is one stable gvim package with
>> version  8.0.0106
>> and one unstable gvim package, with version 8.0.0386.
>>
>> Why portage force me to unmask an unstable version of the package then?
>>

>> [ebuild U  ] app-vim/gentoo-syntax-20170225 [20160530]
>> [ebuild U ~] app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
>
> Because vim-8.0.0386 is stable and, presumably, the vim and gvim versions
> must match. I would suggest filing a stabilisation bug for gvim, or

Isn't it a bit bizarre that portage tries to force users to go
unstable on such an exotic package as one of the two major text
editors?

This can't be good publicity for Gentoo. Yes, I know nobody is after
that, but still...

I couldn't find the name of the maintainer. Maybe different devs are
in charge of vim and gvim?

just
> use emacs...

What do[es] the maintainer[s] use?

Regards

Jorge Almeida

Re: [gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 4 Mar 2017 18:21:23 +0200, gevisz wrote:

> $ eix gvim
> [I] app-editors/gvim
>  Available versions:  8.0.0106 ~8.0.0386 ** {acl aqua cscope
> debug gnome gtk gtk3 lua luajit motif neXt netbeans nls perl python
> racket ruby selinux session tcl PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4
> python3_5 python3_6"}
>  Installed versions:  8.0.0106(05:36:17 PM 12/11/2016)(acl gtk
> python session -aqua -cscope -debug -gnome -gtk3 -lua -luajit -motif
> -neXt -netbeans -nls -perl -racket -ruby -selinux -tcl
> PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4 -python3_5")
>  Homepage:http://www.vim.org/ https://github.com/vim/vim
>  Description: GUI version of the Vim text editor
> 
> So, in my portage tree currently there is one stable gvim package with
> version  8.0.0106
> and one unstable gvim package, with version 8.0.0386.
> 
> Why portage force me to unmask an unstable version of the package then?
> 
> # emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask
> world --exclude chromiumg
> 
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

> [ebuild U  ] app-editors/vim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
> PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python3_6)"
> [ebuild  NS] virtual/libusb-0-r2 [1-r2] ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
> [ebuild U  ] app-vim/gentoo-syntax-20170225 [20160530]
> [ebuild U ~] app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]

Because vim-8.0.0386 is stable and, presumably, the vim and gvim versions
must match. I would suggest filing a stabilisation bug for gvim, or just
use emacs...


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.


pgppq7EdxwlPO.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-user] Why portage demands to unmask an unstable version of the package?

[gevisz]

$ eix gvim
[I] app-editors/gvim
 Available versions:  8.0.0106 ~8.0.0386 ** {acl aqua cscope
debug gnome gtk gtk3 lua luajit motif neXt netbeans nls perl python
racket ruby selinux session tcl PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4
python3_5 python3_6"}
 Installed versions:  8.0.0106(05:36:17 PM 12/11/2016)(acl gtk
python session -aqua -cscope -debug -gnome -gtk3 -lua -luajit -motif
-neXt -netbeans -nls -perl -racket -ruby -selinux -tcl
PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4 -python3_5")
 Homepage:http://www.vim.org/ https://github.com/vim/vim
 Description: GUI version of the Vim text editor

So, in my portage tree currently there is one stable gvim package with
version  8.0.0106
and one unstable gvim package, with version 8.0.0386.

Why portage force me to unmask an unstable version of the package then?

# emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y --newuse --backtrack=90 --ask
world --exclude chromium

These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

Calculating dependencies... done!

The following packages are causing rebuilds:

  (dev-libs/kpathsea-6.2.2_p20160523:0/6.2.2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled
for merge) causes rebuilds for:
(dev-tex/bibtexu-3.71_p20150521:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
(app-text/evince-3.20.1:0/evd3.4-evv3.3::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
(app-text/dvipng-1.15:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
[ebuild  r  U  ] dev-libs/kpathsea-6.2.2_p20160523 [6.2.1_p20150521-r2]
[ebuild U  ] app-editors/vim-core-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
[ebuild   R] x11-base/xorg-drivers-1.18-r1  VIDEO_CARDS="(-omapfb%)"
[ebuild U  ] dev-libs/geoip-1.6.9-r1 [1.6.9]
[ebuild U ~] net-misc/youtube-dl-2017.03.02 [2017.02.22]
[ebuild U  ] dev-python/enum34-1.1.6 [1.0.4]
[ebuild  rR] dev-tex/bibtexu-3.71_p20150521
[ebuild U  ] net-libs/neon-0.30.2 [0.30.1] USE="(-libressl)"
[ebuild  N ] dev-libs/libusb-compat-0.1.5-r2  USE="-debug
-examples -static-libs" ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
[ebuild U  ] app-editors/vim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python3_6)"
[ebuild  NS] virtual/libusb-0-r2 [1-r2] ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
[ebuild U  ] app-vim/gentoo-syntax-20170225 [20160530]
[ebuild U ~] app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 [8.0.0106]
PYTHON_TARGETS="-python3_6%"
[ebuild U  ] app-doc/doxygen-1.8.13-r1 [1.8.12]
[ebuild U  ] app-crypt/gnupg-2.1.18 [2.1.15] USE="smartcard* -wks-server%"
[ebuild U  ] app-crypt/gpgme-1.8.0-r2 [1.5.5] USE="cxx%* -python%
-qt5%" PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7%* python3_4%* (-python3_5)"
[ebuild U  ] media-plugins/gst-plugins-libav-1.10.4 [1.10.3]
[ebuild  rR] app-text/dvipng-1.15
[ebuild  rR] app-text/evince-3.20.1

The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
 (see "package.accept_keywords" in the portage(5) man page for more details)
# required by @selected
# required by @world (argument)
=app-editors/gvim-8.0.0386 ~amd64

Would you like to add these changes to your config files? [Yes/No] n

!!! The following installed packages are masked:
- www-client/opera-12.16_p1860-r1::gentoo (masked by: OPERA-12 license(s))
A copy of the 'OPERA-12' license is located at '/usr/portage/licenses/OPERA-12'.

For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge
man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.