[gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Luis F. Araujo]

Hello everyone,

A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.

So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are still
listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
(A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)

*Please* take a look at http://dev.gentoo.org/~araujo/old_package.mask ,
for the list of these non-existent ebuilds/packages, in case you have 
forgotten something
in there. I'd like if  every person takes care of their own entries if 
possible. 
If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along with 
other
people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion to deal with this?

I *of course* haven't checked all of the entry generated by the script 
manually ,
so there might probably exist packages which are indeed correct, so 
please re-check
before doing something.

I also noticed (slight detail) that there are a couple of recent entries 
at the bottom
of this file, isn't the policy to have new entries added at the top? , 
is there any special
reason for this?

Ok, that's all for now!


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[warnera6]

Luis F. Araujo wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
> about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
> 
> So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
> and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are still
> listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
> (A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)
> 
> *Please* take a look at http://dev.gentoo.org/~araujo/old_package.mask ,
> for the list of these non-existent ebuilds/packages, in case you have 
> forgotten something
> in there. I'd like if  every person takes care of their own entries if 
> possible. If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, 
> along with other
> people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion to deal with this?
> 
> I *of course* haven't checked all of the entry generated by the script 
> manually ,
> so there might probably exist packages which are indeed correct, so 
> please re-check
> before doing something.
> 
> I also noticed (slight detail) that there are a couple of recent entries 
> at the bottom
> of this file, isn't the policy to have new entries added at the top? , 
> is there any special
> reason for this?
> 
> Ok, that's all for now!
> 
> 

Looks like something that could be added to the "list of unstable 
ebuilds" deal that also gets sent here, simple to script... ;)
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Marcus D. Hanwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 845 bytes --]

On Wednesday 23 November 2005 02:18, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
> about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
>
> So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
> and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are still
> listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
> (A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)
>
I am not seeing the packages for the KDE herd - are you accounting for >=? KDE 
3.5 packages are just coming out of rcs, and alpha was long since removed but 
>=alpha1 is package.masked - I am also using this for digikam packages. It 
saves constantly altering the file. Please let me know if you spot any real 
orphan packages owned by KDE and I will look into it.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Luis F. Araujo]

Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:

>On Wednesday 23 November 2005 02:18, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
>  
>
>>Hello everyone,
>>
>>A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
>>about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
>>
>>So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
>>and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are still
>>listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
>>(A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)
>>
>>    
>>
>I am not seeing the packages for the KDE herd - are you accounting for >=? KDE 
>3.5 packages are just coming out of rcs, and alpha was long since removed but 
>  
>
>>=alpha1 is package.masked - I am also using this for digikam packages. 
>>

Yes. The script only checks for non-existent ebuilds.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Donnie Berkholz]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Luis F. Araujo wrote:
| So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
| and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are still
| listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
| (A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)

It would be really helpful if your script could retain the category.

Thanks,
Donnie
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDg+qMXVaO67S1rtsRArJ7AKDprOrVrLoIYT2K+ryGSb0J1wtuAACgvsWz
CPBMqGGMnpL3xDkI4FFAS00=
=JXGU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 560 bytes --]

On Wednesday 23 November 2005 05:05, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Luis F. Araujo wrote:
> | So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
> | and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are
> | still listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
> | (A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)
>
> It would be really helpful if your script could retain the category.

And provide sorted output.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Marius Mauch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1333 bytes --]

On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 22:18:26 -0400
"Luis F. Araujo" <araujo@gentoo.org> wrote:

> So, i wrote a script to try to get a list of those orphaned entries,
> and it looks like there are more than 400 packages/ebuilds which are
> still listed in p.m but that don't exist in the tree anymore.
> (A bunch of them from the KDE herd btw)

Please post that script too, makes things easier to verify.

> *Please* take a look at
> http://dev.gentoo.org/~araujo/old_package.mask , for the list of
> these non-existent ebuilds/packages, in case you have forgotten
> something in there. I'd like if  every person takes care of their own
> entries if possible. 

Please add category information to that list and sort it. Thanks.

> If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
> with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
> to deal with this?

Don't do this without explicitly checking with the maintainer for a
package (if existant). Generally redundant entries in package.mask
don't hurt, so if it's not absolutely clear that the entry is not
needed anymore keep it.

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Alin Nastac]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 677 bytes --]

Marius Mauch wrote:

>>If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
>>with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
>>to deal with this?
>>    
>>
>
>Don't do this without explicitly checking with the maintainer for a
>package (if existant). Generally redundant entries in package.mask
>don't hurt, so if it's not absolutely clear that the entry is not
>needed anymore keep it.
>
>  
>

Hmm.. I fail to see why package.mask shouldn't be cleaned without
everyone's consent.
Assuming the script is correct, why would you contact the maintainer of
package foe when the oldest version in the current tree is bigger than
the masked one?


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 256 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Luis F. Araujo]

Marius Mauch wrote:

>  
>
>>>If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
>>>with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
>>>to deal with this?
>>>   
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Don't do this without explicitly checking with the maintainer for a
>>package (if existant). Generally redundant entries in package.mask
>>don't hurt, so if it's not absolutely clear that the entry is not
>>needed anymore keep it.
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
Thanks for everyone's suggestions. I am gonna tweak even more the script.

I only don't see any reason to keep non-existent entries there.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Marius Mauch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1083 bytes --]

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 08:26:03 +0200
Alin Nastac <mrness@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Marius Mauch wrote:
> 
> >>If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
> >>with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
> >>to deal with this?
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Don't do this without explicitly checking with the maintainer for a
> >package (if existant). Generally redundant entries in package.mask
> >don't hurt, so if it's not absolutely clear that the entry is not
> >needed anymore keep it.
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> Hmm.. I fail to see why package.mask shouldn't be cleaned without
> everyone's consent.
> Assuming the script is correct, why would you contact the maintainer
> of package foe when the oldest version in the current tree is bigger
> than the masked one?

Because there are more scenarios than the one you see.

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Luis F. Araujo]

Marius Mauch wrote:

>On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 08:26:03 +0200
>Alin Nastac <mrness@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Marius Mauch wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>If not, i *personally* could go slowly removing the entries, along
>>>>with other people willing to help, or any other _better_ suggestion
>>>>to deal with this?
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Don't do this without explicitly checking with the maintainer for a
>>>package (if existant). Generally redundant entries in package.mask
>>>don't hurt, so if it's not absolutely clear that the entry is not
>>>needed anymore keep it.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Hmm.. I fail to see why package.mask shouldn't be cleaned without
>>everyone's consent.
>>Assuming the script is correct, why would you contact the maintainer
>>of package foe when the oldest version in the current tree is bigger
>>than the masked one?
>>    
>>
>
>Because there are more scenarios than the one you see.
>
>Marius
>
>  
>
That's precisely why i m asking for every dev taking care of
their own scenarios *if possible*.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Tuan Van]

Luis F. Araujo wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
> about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
> 

please adjust your script.
 >=cat/foo-1.2 is valid even though foo-1.2 is no longer in the tree. I 
looked at the top 4 line in your list, they are all valid entries.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 08:29:36PM -0800, Tuan Van wrote:
> Luis F. Araujo wrote:
> >Hello everyone,
> >
> >A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
> >about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
> >
> 
> please adjust your script.
> >=cat/foo-1.2 is valid even though foo-1.2 is no longer in the tree. I 
> looked at the top 4 line in your list, they are all valid entries.

yes, i imagine there are a bunch of these false positives ... you can
see the gcc-config mask is wrongly flagged for this reason
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 799 bytes --]

On Wednesday 23 November 2005 11:52, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> yes, i imagine there are a bunch of these false positives ... you can
> see the gcc-config mask is wrongly flagged for this reason
And the complete KDE mask that is around 300 ebuilds...
Really, don't have hurry to "fix" those entries before a true check is done.
[as I said on #-dev, there's enough code to parse and check p.mask on my 
ruby-checker in gentoo-alt overlay... I actually did use it to check 
senseless masking with 4 lines of extra ruby code a part the already present 
classes, when I first noticed this problem and referred it on #-dev (before 
Doug opened the bug, that is)]

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Luis F. Araujo]

Mike Frysinger wrote:

>On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 08:29:36PM -0800, Tuan Van wrote:
>  
>
>>Luis F. Araujo wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Hello everyone,
>>>
>>>A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
>>>about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>please adjust your script.
>>    
>>
>>>=cat/foo-1.2 is valid even though foo-1.2 is no longer in the tree. I 
>>>      
>>>
>>looked at the top 4 line in your list, they are all valid entries.
>>    
>>
>
>yes, i imagine there are a bunch of these false positives ... you can
>see the gcc-config mask is wrongly flagged for this reason
>-mike
>  
>
Yes, the script as you might already noticed only checks for specific
ebuilds versions entries.

I will try to tweak a it a bit more so it could filter more properly
the list.

Oh, and i am using a small interpreter i am writing for the script ,
so _many_ things are being proved here, so bear with me :-)
 
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Around 425 non-existent packages in p.mask?

[Chris White]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 276 bytes --]

On Wednesday 23 November 2005 11:18, Luis F. Araujo wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> A few days ago i glanced over package.mask , and i was surprised
> about how many non-existent ebuild/packages entries are there.

er:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105016

Chris White

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]