[gentoo-dev] Fw: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[gentoo-dev] Fw: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4758 bytes --]

Hello,

Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
gentoo-dev.

If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
file bugs for the remaining packages then.

Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).

Consider it your priority to either replace the || () block with
a working solution (e.g. USE flags), or remove the := operator.


Begin forwarded message:

Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 16:44:50 +0000
From: mgorny@bonedaddy.net
To: <gentoo-automated-testing@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!


Looks like someone just broke Gentoo!

New issues:

https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#app-i18n/poedit 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#app-misc/tracker 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#app-misc/wyrd 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-libs/liblognorm 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/camomile 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/comparelib 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/deriving-ocsigen 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/enumerate 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/extlib 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/faillib 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/fieldslib 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/lablgl 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/lablgtk 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/lwt 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/macaque 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/ocaml-data-notation 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/ocaml-gettext 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/ocamldsort 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/ocamlnet 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/optcomp 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/pa_bench 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/pipebang 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/pomap 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/pxp 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/typehashlib 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-ml/utop 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-util/coccinelle 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#dev-vcs/darcs 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#gnome-extra/cinnamon-settings-daemon 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#gnustep-base/gnustep-make 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#mate-extra/mate-power-manager 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#media-libs/mesa 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#media-libs/oyranos 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#media-libs/xine-lib 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#media-video/mpv 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#net-libs/libzrtpcpp 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#net-misc/xrdp 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#sci-mathematics/coq 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#sci-mathematics/rstudio 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#sci-physics/root 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#www-servers/ocsigenserver 
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ace7f15/output.html#www-servers/varnish


Changes since last check:
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/log/?qt=range&q=..d8885d5

--
Gentoo repository CI



-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Fw: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Andrew Savchenko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1368 bytes --]

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:42:18 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
> to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
> gentoo-dev.
> 
> If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
> file bugs for the remaining packages then.
> 
> Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
> completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
> managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).

Please explain in more details why this is forbidden. man 5 ebuild
contains nothing about this, I can't find anything in PMS also. If
package manager misbehaves this doesn't automatically imply that
ebuilds are broken (and not PM).

> Consider it your priority to either replace the || () block with
> a working solution (e.g. USE flags), or remove the := operator.

What if package contains:
  || ( cat/foo:= cat/bar:= )
That is, it can work with either foo or bar, but needs to be
rebuild on subslot changes. Are you suggesting to add USE flags
for each alternative under each || () clause? This is ridiculous
if foo and bar are drop-in replacements of one another. And
dropping := will just break stuff if foo or bar contain more than
single subslot.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Fw: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2528 bytes --]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 00:06:10 +0300
Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:42:18 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
> > to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
> > gentoo-dev.
> > 
> > If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
> > file bugs for the remaining packages then.
> > 
> > Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
> > completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
> > managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).  
> 
> Please explain in more details why this is forbidden. man 5 ebuild
> contains nothing about this, I can't find anything in PMS also. If
> package manager misbehaves this doesn't automatically imply that
> ebuilds are broken (and not PM).

It was explained already. PMS doesn't permit it. It doesn't make *any*
sense, so the author didn't even bother explicitly saying it's
forbidden. Package manager can't not misbehave if something can't be
implemented.

> > Consider it your priority to either replace the || () block with
> > a working solution (e.g. USE flags), or remove the := operator.  
> 
> What if package contains:
>   || ( cat/foo:= cat/bar:= )
> That is, it can work with either foo or bar, but needs to be
> rebuild on subslot changes.

No, that's not what it means. It means 'the package can work with
either cat/foo:= or cat/bar:=, and you can switch between the two
*without* rebuilding'. That's what || () means.

How are you going to combine that with := that binds it to a specific
slot/subslot? This is illogical.

> Are you suggesting to add USE flags
> for each alternative under each || () clause? This is ridiculous
> if foo and bar are drop-in replacements of one another. And
> dropping := will just break stuff if foo or bar contain more than
> single subslot.

That is the only legitimate option I know if packages are not
ABI-compatible. If they are, then you are supposed to create a proper
virtual (see libudev for example) rather than assume some := fairies
will magically match slots of two different packages.

But as I said, this was all explained before. More than once. But then,
why bother searching... it's better if you complain all the time,
and expect others to do a lot of work to satisfy you.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Fw: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Ian Stakenvicius]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2024 bytes --]

On 17/06/16 05:22 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 00:06:10 +0300
> Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:42:18 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
>>> to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
>>> gentoo-dev.
>>>
>>> If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
>>> file bugs for the remaining packages then.
>>>
>>> Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
>>> completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
>>> managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).  
>>
>> Please explain in more details why this is forbidden. man 5 ebuild
>> contains nothing about this, I can't find anything in PMS also. If
>> package manager misbehaves this doesn't automatically imply that
>> ebuilds are broken (and not PM).
> 
> It was explained already. PMS doesn't permit it. It doesn't make *any*
> sense, so the author didn't even bother explicitly saying it's
> forbidden. Package manager can't not misbehave if something can't be
> implemented.
> 

Where does PMS not permit it??

8.2: [...]
An any-of group, which consists of the string ||, followed by
whitespace, followed by an open parenthesis, followed by whitespace,
followed by zero or more of (a dependency item of any kind followed by
whitespace), followed by a close parenthesis.


"dependency item of any kind" would certainly include atoms with slot
operators.


There is also no caveat at all in 8.2.3 that excludes slot operators,
and 8.2.6.3 also contains no caveat or exclusion of slot operators
from any-of groups.


Using slot operators within OR deps was intended when EAPI5 was
introduced.  If Portage and other PMs don't handle it well or properly
then they should be fixed, and perhaps the spec should be refined in
EAPI7, but that doesn't mean banning it now.




[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] [tangent] Re: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Ian Stakenvicius]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2348 bytes --]

On 17/06/16 06:17 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 17/06/16 05:22 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 00:06:10 +0300
>> Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:42:18 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
>>>> to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
>>>> gentoo-dev.
>>>>
>>>> If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
>>>> file bugs for the remaining packages then.
>>>>
>>>> Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
>>>> completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
>>>> managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).  
>>>
>>> Please explain in more details why this is forbidden. man 5 ebuild
>>> contains nothing about this, I can't find anything in PMS also. If
>>> package manager misbehaves this doesn't automatically imply that
>>> ebuilds are broken (and not PM).
>>
>> It was explained already. PMS doesn't permit it. It doesn't make *any*
>> sense, so the author didn't even bother explicitly saying it's
>> forbidden. Package manager can't not misbehave if something can't be
>> implemented.
>>
> 
> Where does PMS not permit it??
> 
> 8.2: [...]
> An any-of group, which consists of the string ||, followed by
> whitespace, followed by an open parenthesis, followed by whitespace,
> followed by zero or more of (a dependency item of any kind followed by
> whitespace), followed by a close parenthesis.
> 
> 
> "dependency item of any kind" would certainly include atoms with slot
> operators.
> 
> 
> There is also no caveat at all in 8.2.3 that excludes slot operators,
> and 8.2.6.3 also contains no caveat or exclusion of slot operators
> from any-of groups.
> 
> 
> Using slot operators within OR deps was intended when EAPI5 was
> introduced.  If Portage and other PMs don't handle it well or properly
> then they should be fixed, and perhaps the spec should be refined in
> EAPI7, but that doesn't mean banning it now.
> 
> 
> 


Now, one thing that *is* banned is the use of :[SLOT]/[Sub-Slot]
values in ebuilds, as per PMS s.8.2.6.3  -- I know there's plenty of
ebuilds that are doing that, including in virtuals.




[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: [tangent] Re: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Jonathan Callen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2662 bytes --]

On 06/17/2016 06:22 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 17/06/16 06:17 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> On 17/06/16 05:22 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 00:06:10 +0300
>>> Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:42:18 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
>>>>> to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
>>>>> gentoo-dev.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
>>>>> file bugs for the remaining packages then.
>>>>>
>>>>> Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
>>>>> completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
>>>>> managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).  
>>>>
>>>> Please explain in more details why this is forbidden. man 5 ebuild
>>>> contains nothing about this, I can't find anything in PMS also. If
>>>> package manager misbehaves this doesn't automatically imply that
>>>> ebuilds are broken (and not PM).
>>>
>>> It was explained already. PMS doesn't permit it. It doesn't make *any*
>>> sense, so the author didn't even bother explicitly saying it's
>>> forbidden. Package manager can't not misbehave if something can't be
>>> implemented.
>>>
>>
>> Where does PMS not permit it??
>>
>> 8.2: [...]
>> An any-of group, which consists of the string ||, followed by
>> whitespace, followed by an open parenthesis, followed by whitespace,
>> followed by zero or more of (a dependency item of any kind followed by
>> whitespace), followed by a close parenthesis.
>>
>>
>> "dependency item of any kind" would certainly include atoms with slot
>> operators.
>>
>>
>> There is also no caveat at all in 8.2.3 that excludes slot operators,
>> and 8.2.6.3 also contains no caveat or exclusion of slot operators
>> from any-of groups.
>>
>>
>> Using slot operators within OR deps was intended when EAPI5 was
>> introduced.  If Portage and other PMs don't handle it well or properly
>> then they should be fixed, and perhaps the spec should be refined in
>> EAPI7, but that doesn't mean banning it now.
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> Now, one thing that *is* banned is the use of :[SLOT]/[Sub-Slot]
> values in ebuilds, as per PMS s.8.2.6.3  -- I know there's plenty of
> ebuilds that are doing that, including in virtuals.
> 
> 
> 

No, the specific syntax that is banned is ":0/0=" (that is, both a
subslot and a slot operator).  It is perfectly legal to depend on ":0/0"
or on ":0=", but not on ":0/0=".

-- 
Jonathan Callen


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [tangent] Re: [gentoo-automated-testing] BROKEN: repository became broken!

[Ian Stakenvicius]

> On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:48 PM, Jonathan Callen <jcallen@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 06/17/2016 06:22 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>> On 17/06/16 06:17 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>>> On 17/06/16 05:22 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 18 Jun 2016 00:06:10 +0300
>>>> Andrew Savchenko <bircoph@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 19:42:18 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Since this is a major issue involving a lot of packages, and it needs
>>>>>> to be fixed *quickly*, I'm forwarding the new check results to
>>>>>> gentoo-dev.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If the below list contains your package, please fix it ASAP. I will
>>>>>> file bugs for the remaining packages then.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Long story short, using := operator inside || () conditional blocks is
>>>>>> completely forbidden and triggers random misbehavior inside package
>>>>>> managers (Portage doesn't do exactly what you think it does).  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please explain in more details why this is forbidden. man 5 ebuild
>>>>> contains nothing about this, I can't find anything in PMS also. If
>>>>> package manager misbehaves this doesn't automatically imply that
>>>>> ebuilds are broken (and not PM).
>>>> 
>>>> It was explained already. PMS doesn't permit it. It doesn't make *any*
>>>> sense, so the author didn't even bother explicitly saying it's
>>>> forbidden. Package manager can't not misbehave if something can't be
>>>> implemented.
>>> 
>>> Where does PMS not permit it??
>>> 
>>> 8.2: [...]
>>> An any-of group, which consists of the string ||, followed by
>>> whitespace, followed by an open parenthesis, followed by whitespace,
>>> followed by zero or more of (a dependency item of any kind followed by
>>> whitespace), followed by a close parenthesis.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> "dependency item of any kind" would certainly include atoms with slot
>>> operators.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> There is also no caveat at all in 8.2.3 that excludes slot operators,
>>> and 8.2.6.3 also contains no caveat or exclusion of slot operators
>>> from any-of groups.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Using slot operators within OR deps was intended when EAPI5 was
>>> introduced.  If Portage and other PMs don't handle it well or properly
>>> then they should be fixed, and perhaps the spec should be refined in
>>> EAPI7, but that doesn't mean banning it now.
>> 
>> 
>> Now, one thing that *is* banned is the use of :[SLOT]/[Sub-Slot]
>> values in ebuilds, as per PMS s.8.2.6.3  -- I know there's plenty of
>> ebuilds that are doing that, including in virtuals.
> 
> No, the specific syntax that is banned is ":0/0=" (that is, both a
> subslot and a slot operator).  It is perfectly legal to depend on ":0/0"
> or on ":0=", but not on ":0/0=".
> 

Ah, thank you for that clarification -- I didn't catch the language was specifying the subslot as coming before the equal sign.

Well, good that this would be banned given it wouldn't make any sense (triggering a rebuild when the subslot changes, while tying something to a single slot/subslot value, would never do anything)