RE: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

RE: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Sean P. Kane]

Why do you all read so much into it? Culprit, was the wrong choice of
words, but the email was neither mean or bad-spirited. It was obvious he
was just saying that this should be masked quickly to avoid a lot of
users running into this problem. The east/west refernce is simply
juvinille. Having spent a great many years in both places, I can testify
that it is a meaningless and inaccurate stereotype anyways. All this
does is point out the real lesson to be learned here. Gentoo may be
"cutting-edge", but the stability problems MUST be fixed, expecially in
Portafge, because if it breaks, it can leave a system in a very
difficult to recover state. We should all display enough maturity to not
label email headers "SERIOUSLY fucked up ?", avoid labeling people, and
simply work at fixing the problems and moving on. Those of us who need
stable systems for the moment, need to be much more cautious about
upgrading our systems, until Gentoo has a better system to ensure stable
releases.

Sean

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean P. Kane
spkane@genomatica.com
Lead Infrastructure Architect
Genomatica, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"When we destroy something man has created we call it vandalism......
When we destroy something that Gaia has created we call it progress."


-----Original Message-----
From: Henti Smith [mailto:bain@tcsn.co.za] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:35
To: Adam Voigt
Cc: drobbins@gentoo.org; veldy@veldy.net; aurelien@gouny.org;
kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; manson@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


On 17 Dec 2002 11:15:15 -0500
Adam Voigt <adam@cryptocomm.com> wrote:

> How about not sterotyping?

I'm not steriotyping. Just saying why fight when working together can
solve the problem without getting all worked up about it.

> Not all western'ers want to blame people and not all eastern'ers are
> so forgiving.

> How about you find out who did it, to help them realize there mistake
> and not make it again, then fix the problem?

since I haven't emerged this portage I don't have this problem. fixing
something that is not borken on my system is pretty hard. I also don't
think the person responcible.

Henti 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Portage and QA

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1289 bytes --]

On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 12:40, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> All this
> does is point out the real lesson to be learned here. Gentoo may be
> "cutting-edge", but the stability problems MUST be fixed, expecially in
> Portafge, because if it breaks, it can leave a system in a very
> difficult to recover state. 

We actually have a good QA procedure in place for Portage. The problem
was caused by a senior developer doing things that he shouldn't and not
following this procedure. 

Again, I don't want to make this person feel worse than he already does
(and he does feel bad about his error in judgement.) I sharing this info
for the sole purpose of letting everyone know that normally this problem
would have been caught way before it hit end-users, and that we *do*
have a QA procedure in place for Portage.

Today, I've made extra sure that all our devs are very clear on the
rules regarding new Portage releases. I've done what's necessary to help
ensure that issues like this are avoided in the future. I am now going
to incorporate these details regarding Portage QA into our official
policy documentation on the Web site so that future developers will do
the right thing too.

Sincerely,

-- 
Daniel Robbins
Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Ragnar Hojland Espinosa]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 11:40:00AM -0800, Sean P. Kane wrote:

> Portafge, because if it breaks, it can leave a system in a very
> difficult to recover state. We should all display enough maturity to not
> label email headers "SERIOUSLY fucked up ?", avoid labeling people, and
> simply work at fixing the problems and moving on. Those of us who need

Since I wrote the original subject, I feel addressed.  What does maturity
have to do with a program that (was) fucked up?  

     - It was broken? Yes.
     - It broke earlier versions? Yes.
     - It broke the system too? Yes.
     - Did the recovery involve infrequent procedures? Yes.

I'd say it being seriously fucked up was a good description, right? [0]
Anyway, I'm only interested in people not getting bitten by it.  I shall
not reply anything else about this.

[0] Now, the other possibility is that you dont like to read that word.  In
    that case I suggest you to sed your emails and dont ever look at
    dictionaries.  Or pluck your eyes out ;) 
-- 
Ragnar Hojland - Project Manager
Linalco "Especialistas Linux y en Software Libre"
http://www.linalco.com Tel: +34-91-5970074 Fax: +34-91-5970083

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Ragnar Hojland Espinosa]

After emerging portage, trying to emerge anything killed the system.  It
turned out that gcc and cpp had changed to a script like

       cat gcc
       #!/bin/sh
       gcc "$@"

I assume its because of the rm-f typo in ebuild.sh

-- 
Ragnar Hojland - Project Manager
Linalco "Especialistas Linux y en Software Libre"
http://www.linalco.com Tel: +34-91-5970074 Fax: +34-91-5970083

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

This better not be true globally!  I hav a server updating right now.

Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ragnar Hojland Espinosa" <ragnar@linalco.com>
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:18 AM
Subject: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


> After emerging portage, trying to emerge anything killed the system.  It
> turned out that gcc and cpp had changed to a script like
> 
>        cat gcc
>        #!/bin/sh
>        gcc "$@"
> 
> I assume its because of the rm-f typo in ebuild.sh
> 
> -- 
> Ragnar Hojland - Project Manager
> Linalco "Especialistas Linux y en Software Libre"
> http://www.linalco.com Tel: +34-91-5970074 Fax: +34-91-5970083
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Jaeggi, Daniel M.]

Exactly the same issue - same bug in ebuild.sh.

So, I take it gcc is up for a rebuid then!

Dan

Ragnar Hojland Espinosa wrote:

>After emerging portage, trying to emerge anything killed the system.  It
>turned out that gcc and cpp had changed to a script like
>
>       cat gcc
>       #!/bin/sh
>       gcc "$@"
>
>I assume its because of the rm-f typo in ebuild.sh
>
>  
>



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[konstantinos Dolkas]

Στις Τρι 17 Δεκ 2002 15:18, ο/η Ragnar Hojland Espinosa έγραψε:
> After emerging portage, trying to emerge anything killed the system.  It
> turned out that gcc and cpp had changed to a script like
>
>        cat gcc
>        #!/bin/sh
>        gcc "$@"
>
> I assume its because of the rm-f typo in ebuild.sh

We 've had the same problem as well

3 pc's that downloaded portage from 2 different sites....

I am fear there is a hoax of some kind


cheers,

Konstantinos

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Rodney,

Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.

Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message -----
From: "konstantinos Dolkas" <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>
To: <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


Στις Τρι 17 Δεκ 2002 15:18, ο/η Ragnar Hojland Espinosa έγραψε:
> After emerging portage, trying to emerge anything killed the system.  It
> turned out that gcc and cpp had changed to a script like
>
>        cat gcc
>        #!/bin/sh
>        gcc "$@"
>
> I assume its because of the rm-f typo in ebuild.sh

We 've had the same problem as well

3 pc's that downloaded portage from 2 different sites....

I am fear there is a hoax of some kind


cheers,

Konstantinos

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Aurélien Gouny]

Thomas T. Veldhouse said:
> Rodney,
>
> Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.
>
> Tom Veldhouse
>

I'm not Rodney but I've made a 'emerge rsync' and there is no portage to
be updated, it seems to have been masked.

Thanks guys for warning,
-- 
Aurélien Gouny
______________________________
Email: aurelien@gouny.org
Web: http://aurelien.gouny.org



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Rodney is the port maintainer for portage.  He obviously needs to get some
sleep and test in ~ first!

Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aurélien Gouny" <aurelien@gouny.org>
To: <veldy@veldy.net>
Cc: <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>; <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; <manson@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


>
> Thomas T. Veldhouse said:
> > Rodney,
> >
> > Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.
> >
> > Tom Veldhouse
> >
>
> I'm not Rodney but I've made a 'emerge rsync' and there is no portage to
> be updated, it seems to have been masked.
>
> Thanks guys for warning,
> --
> Aurélien Gouny
> ______________________________
> Email: aurelien@gouny.org
> Web: http://aurelien.gouny.org
>
>
>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

OK -- the culprit is NOT Rodney.  Rodney is the only person who has made an
entry into the changelog.  The real culprit seems to be Daniel Robbins. ;)
I apologize to Rodney for implicating you as the person who has done the
damage to portage.

Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>
To: "Aurélien Gouny" <aurelien@gouny.org>
Cc: <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>; <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; <manson@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


> Rodney is the port maintainer for portage.  He obviously needs to get some
> sleep and test in ~ first!
>
> Tom Veldhouse
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aurélien Gouny" <aurelien@gouny.org>
> To: <veldy@veldy.net>
> Cc: <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>; <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>;
<manson@gentoo.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?
>
>
> >
> > Thomas T. Veldhouse said:
> > > Rodney,
> > >
> > > Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.
> > >
> > > Tom Veldhouse
> > >
> >
> > I'm not Rodney but I've made a 'emerge rsync' and there is no portage to
> > be updated, it seems to have been masked.
> >
> > Thanks guys for warning,
> > --
> > Aurélien Gouny
> > ______________________________
> > Email: aurelien@gouny.org
> > Web: http://aurelien.gouny.org
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 743 bytes --]

On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 07:55, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> OK -- the culprit is NOT Rodney.  Rodney is the only person who has made an
> entry into the changelog.  The real culprit seems to be Daniel Robbins. ;)
> I apologize to Rodney for implicating you as the person who has done the
> damage to portage.

I really dislike this whole theme of finding the "culprit," since I
don't think it's helpful. If you're interested, you can view the
ChangeLogs here:

http://cvs.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/gentoo-src/portage/ChangeLog?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup

I'll do what I can to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen
again.

-- 
Daniel Robbins
Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Sorry about that.  I was not intending to find the culprit.  Rather, I
originally posted the message to who I though must have made the change (via
the Changelog) so that the fix would be expidited.  Then, when I was
informed that Rodney was not the person that made the change, but rather you
were, I made the comment (poor choice of words when I used "culprit") only
in trying to apologize to Rodney for pointing at him.  Then I was told yet
again that you didn't do it.  Well ... sorry, I apologize for the innocent.
However, this is an ugly situation and dangerous.

I appreciate the response and the good work with Gentoo -- Everybody.

Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Robbins" <drobbins@gentoo.org>
To: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>
Cc: "Aurélien Gouny" <aurelien@gouny.org>; <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>;
<gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; <manson@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 07:55, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> OK -- the culprit is NOT Rodney.  Rodney is the only person who has made
an
> entry into the changelog.  The real culprit seems to be Daniel Robbins. ;)
> I apologize to Rodney for implicating you as the person who has done the
> damage to portage.

I really dislike this whole theme of finding the "culprit," since I
don't think it's helpful. If you're interested, you can view the
ChangeLogs here:

http://cvs.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/gentoo-src/portage/ChangeLog?rev=H
EAD&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup

I'll do what I can to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen
again.

--
Daniel Robbins
Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Henti Smith]

On 17 Dec 2002 09:10:23 -0700
Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I really dislike this whole theme of finding the "culprit," since I
> don't think it's helpful. If you're interested, you can view the
> ChangeLogs here:

A typical western attitude. Something is broken/wrong find somebody to blame.
Addapt an eastern attidute. Something is broken/wrong fix it no need to blame anybody

Henti Smith 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Adam Voigt]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 949 bytes --]

How about not sterotyping?
Not all western'ers want to blame people and not all eastern'ers are so
forgiving.
How about you find out who did it, to help them realize there mistake
and not make
it again, then fix the problem?

On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 13:17, Henti Smith wrote:

    On 17 Dec 2002 09:10:23 -0700
    Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org> wrote:
    
    > I really dislike this whole theme of finding the "culprit," since
    I
    > don't think it's helpful. If you're interested, you can view the
    > ChangeLogs here:
    
    A typical western attitude. Something is broken/wrong find somebody
    to blame.
    Addapt an eastern attidute. Something is broken/wrong fix it no need
    to blame anybody
    
    Henti Smith 
    
    --
    gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
    

-- 
Adam Voigt (adam@cryptocomm.com)
The Cryptocomm Group
My GPG Key: http://64.238.252.49:8080/adam_at_cryptocomm.asc

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2370 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Henti Smith]

On 17 Dec 2002 11:15:15 -0500
Adam Voigt <adam@cryptocomm.com> wrote:

> How about not sterotyping?

I'm not steriotyping. Just saying why fight when working together can solve the problem without getting all worked up about it.

> Not all western'ers want to blame people and not all eastern'ers are so
> forgiving.

> How about you find out who did it, to help them realize there mistake
> and not make
> it again, then fix the problem?

since I haven't emerged this portage I don't have this problem. fixing something that is not borken on my system is pretty hard.
I also don't think the person responcible.

Henti 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Don't blame it on the west, Mr Smith :)

I wasn't [originally] trying to blame anybody, I was originally trying to
tell the person I thought had made the mistake (via the Changelog) to please
fix it asap (hence my direct CC) rather than have that person have to wait
and wade through the list.

No matter which longitude the attitude comes from, the bug needs fixing, but
more importantly, the bug should never have made into stable.  This really
should be an effort to shore up quality control, no blame attributed to
anybody in particular.  The result should be that a mistake is learned from,
not ignored.  Daniel says that it won't be ignored, so I am very happy with
that response.

Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henti Smith" <bain@tcsn.co.za>
To: "Daniel Robbins" <drobbins@gentoo.org>
Cc: <veldy@veldy.net>; <aurelien@gouny.org>; <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>;
<gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; <manson@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


> On 17 Dec 2002 09:10:23 -0700
> Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > I really dislike this whole theme of finding the "culprit," since I
> > don't think it's helpful. If you're interested, you can view the
> > ChangeLogs here:
>
> A typical western attitude. Something is broken/wrong find somebody to
blame.
> Addapt an eastern attidute. Something is broken/wrong fix it no need to
blame anybody
>
> Henti Smith
>
>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Aurelien Gouny]

On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 17:20, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Don't blame it on the west, Mr Smith :)
> 
> I wasn't [originally] trying to blame anybody, I was originally trying to
> tell the person I thought had made the mistake (via the Changelog) to please
> fix it asap (hence my direct CC) rather than have that person have to wait
> and wade through the list.
> 
> No matter which longitude the attitude comes from, the bug needs fixing, but
> more importantly, the bug should never have made into stable.  This really
> should be an effort to shore up quality control, no blame attributed to
> anybody in particular.  The result should be that a mistake is learned from,
> not ignored.  Daniel says that it won't be ignored, so I am very happy with
> that response.
> 
> Tom Veldhouse
> 
I would like to thanks Tom Veldhouse!
Without him I would be running a 'crashed' Gentoo Linux because I was
about to make a emerge rsync when I red his email.

Even if he made a mistake in what he said, that's all understable, I
would have made the same thing: first post an alert asap THEN get a look
on the ChangeLog !
And even if this portage revision should never have been in the stable
tree, we don't have to forget that we're humans, that we can make errors
(even more when we're something to make something useful) and that
backup is the only real way to have our data safe!

Thanks again Tom,
PS: sorry for my english ;)
-- 
Aurelien Gouny <aurelien@gouny.org>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Riyad Kalla]

Yes this is much better than finding a culprit, lets mass-label it.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henti Smith [mailto:bain@tcsn.co.za] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 11:17 AM
> To: Daniel Robbins
> Cc: veldy@veldy.net; aurelien@gouny.org; 
> kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; manson@gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?
> 
> 
> On 17 Dec 2002 09:10:23 -0700
> Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > I really dislike this whole theme of finding the "culprit," since I 
> > don't think it's helpful. If you're interested, you can view the 
> > ChangeLogs here:
> 
> A typical western attitude. Something is broken/wrong find 
> somebody to blame. Addapt an eastern attidute. Something is 
> broken/wrong fix it no need to blame anybody
> 
> Henti Smith 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Thomas T. Veldhouse]

Well, I just rsynced and it is still there!

root@fuggle root # emerge -pu world

These are the packages that I would merge, in order.

Calculating world dependencies ...done!
[ebuild    U ] sys-apps/portage-2.0.45-r6 [2.0.45-r5]
*** Portage will stop merging at this point and reload itself,
    recalculate dependancies, and complete the merge.

[ebuild    U ] app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.1-r3 [1.4.1-r2]
[ebuild    UD] sys-apps/hdparm-5.2-r3 [5.3-r1]
[ebuild    U ] net-misc/ntp-4.1.1b-r1 [4.1.1b-r0]


Tom Veldhouse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aurélien Gouny" <aurelien@gouny.org>
To: <veldy@veldy.net>
Cc: <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>; <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; <manson@gentoo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:53 AM
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


>
> Thomas T. Veldhouse said:
> > Rodney,
> >
> > Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.
> >
> > Tom Veldhouse
> >
>
> I'm not Rodney but I've made a 'emerge rsync' and there is no portage to
> be updated, it seems to have been masked.
>
> Thanks guys for warning,
> --
> Aurélien Gouny
> ______________________________
> Email: aurelien@gouny.org
> Web: http://aurelien.gouny.org
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[wes chow]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN, Size: 1758 bytes --]



I just rsynced and portage -r6 is masked.  I also noticed the hdparm 
downgrade, though.  Does anybody know why this is?  The ChangeLog entry is 
the same as the ChangeLog entry for portage -r6.


Wes


On Tue, 17 Dec 2002, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

> Well, I just rsynced and it is still there!
> 
> root@fuggle root # emerge -pu world
> 
> These are the packages that I would merge, in order.
> 
> Calculating world dependencies ...done!
> [ebuild    U ] sys-apps/portage-2.0.45-r6 [2.0.45-r5]
> *** Portage will stop merging at this point and reload itself,
>     recalculate dependancies, and complete the merge.
> 
> [ebuild    U ] app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.1-r3 [1.4.1-r2]
> [ebuild    UD] sys-apps/hdparm-5.2-r3 [5.3-r1]
> [ebuild    U ] net-misc/ntp-4.1.1b-r1 [4.1.1b-r0]
> 
> 
> Tom Veldhouse
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aurélien Gouny" <aurelien@gouny.org>
> To: <veldy@veldy.net>
> Cc: <kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr>; <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; <manson@gentoo.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 7:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?
> 
> 
> >
> > Thomas T. Veldhouse said:
> > > Rodney,
> > >
> > > Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.
> > >
> > > Tom Veldhouse
> > >
> >
> > I'm not Rodney but I've made a 'emerge rsync' and there is no portage to
> > be updated, it seems to have been masked.
> >
> > Thanks guys for warning,
> > --
> > Aurélien Gouny
> > ______________________________
> > Email: aurelien@gouny.org
> > Web: http://aurelien.gouny.org
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Georgios Kylafas]

On Tuesday 17 December 2002 15:53, Aurélien Gouny wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse said:
> > Rodney,
> >
> > Please remask this (portage-2.0.45-r6) ASAP.
> >
> > Tom Veldhouse
>
> I'm not Rodney but I've made a 'emerge rsync' and there is no portage to
> be updated, it seems to have been masked.

I checked /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask after a new "emerge sync" and 
the relevant line says:

# <carpaski@gentoo.org> (15 Dec 2002)
# Masking for prelink testing.
>sys-apps/portage-2.0.45-r6

I would expect it to be ">=sys-apps/portage-2.0.45-r6" (note the equal 
sign), if it was masked indeed.

I also did:

ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -up world

and it did not turn up portage-2.0.45-r6 either. Any clues how it 
disappeared?

Furthermore, does anyone have any suggestions on how to recover from a 
merging of that offensive portage-2.0.45-r6? My approach is to compile (on 
another machine) glibc and gcc (with ebuild xxx.ebuild package) and move it 
over to the broken machine.

Giorgos

-- 
Georgios E. Kylafas
gkyla@mail.ntua.gr

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list