Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving the Sandbox project

[Mart Raudsepp <leio@gentoo.org>]

Ühel kenal päeval, N, 21.09.2017 kell 22:54, kirjutas Michał Górny:
> W dniu czw, 21.09.2017 o godzinie 23∶33 +0300, użytkownik Mart
> Raudsepp
> napisał:
> > Ühel kenal päeval, N, 21.09.2017 kell 21:56, kirjutas Michał Górny:
> > > Hi, everyone.
> > > 
> > > TL;DR: I'm looking for new people to resume work on sandbox, and
> > > I
> > > will
> > > most likely branch it at v2.10 and start keep-alive work on top
> > > of
> > > that.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The state of our sandbox is not very well. Gentoo is currently
> > > using
> > > the old v2.10 with local patches. v2.11 is p.masked for a long
> > > time
> > > because of multiple unsolved bugs. The git repository also
> > > includes
> > > v2.12 tag that has not even been packaged for Gentoo. From what
> > > I've
> > > been able to establish, the bugs causing v2.11 mask are still
> > > present
> > > in git head.
> > > 
> > > To add to this, the only person maintaining the code (vapier) has
> > > not
> > > touched it since March, and AFAIA he's not responding to any
> > > contact
> > > attempts from within Gentoo. Given this and the importance of
> > > sandbox
> > > to
> > > Gentoo at the moment, I think it's reasonable to presume he's MIA
> > > and start looking for volunteers to join the effort.
> > > 
> > > I have already added myself to the project page [1] and I'm going
> > > to
> > > try
> > > to put some effort into improving the state of things. However,
> > > I'm
> > > not
> > > really an expert in the high magic used in sandbox. If anyone is
> > > interested in helping out, feel free to add yourself as well.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The above considered, I don't think I'm really going to be able
> > > to
> > > solve
> > > the problems introduced by v2.11. If nobody has a better idea,
> > > I'm
> > > going
> > > to branch sandbox at v2.10 and look into backporting whatever's
> > > feasible
> > > and resuming development in hotfix mode on top of that.
> > 
> > Do you have a handy list of problems with v2.11?
> > Perhaps all is well for Gentoo usages after the more ptrace-happy
> > fallbacking commit (apparently was needed by ChromeOS) is reverted
> > if
> > ptrace-path problems don't get fixes?
> > 
> 
> There are two bugs listed in p.mask reason. There's a lot of bugs on
> Bugzilla but I don't know which versions they affect.


#580726 comes from the ptrace thing I mentioned. I identified the
commit that makes it fallback to ptrace for firefox case, while it
seemed to work fine before without fallback, and then there are issues
in that ptrace codepath that might have always been there, but they
just didn't get hit due to ptrace fallback being much rarer before
this. I believe the commit hash is mentioned on the bug.

#578582 seems to be just patrick being special and refusing to provide
any information about the bug that no-one else hits.

Maybe if we revert that more easy ptrace fallback stuff for now, the
rest in sandbox git master is fine (if my opendir fix gets applied
that's only patched in via ebuild right now)?

Mart