From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E37601381F3 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 21:18:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BFD3EE08E8; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 21:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 049D4E08CA for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 21:18:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.154] (unknown [67.143.225.105]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: creffett) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6D80933E753 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 21:18:05 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <51E709F5.8020802@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 17:17:41 -0400 From: Chris Reffett User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.6 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] cmake-utils.eclass and bug 475502 References: <51E7051C.1070401@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <51E7051C.1070401@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: d2f914dc-bac8-4798-8a6c-c0b80d1267f7 X-Archives-Hash: bc347b614f322507376fbbeaa2c11d1f -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote: > I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to > cmake-utils.eclass, however... it is not enough to give a deadline > without caring if people actually fixed it by then. > > By doing that you risk breaking stable packages which is not > trivial. > > You _must_ do a tinderbox run, test that stuff in an overlay or > whatever. You are responsible for ALL reverse deps. > > The way it was done... was not appropriate. Please be more careful > next time. There are still incoming bugs about broken base_src_* > calls. (see the tracker) > I discussed this with hasufell on IRC, but I'll lay out the response on the list too. Yes, this was my fault. We (KDE team) tested in our overlay, but none of the packages there use the base_src_* calls, which is why it didn't come up in testing, and I did not realize that there were packages that did rely on the implicit base inherit to call base_src_* directly. Chris Reffett -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iKYEARECAGYFAlHnCfVfFIAAAAAALgAoaXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3Bl bnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEM2NzU5RjUyMDczREJDQkVDQTBDRkE1NERC Nzk1QThBNDI2MTgzNTQACgkQ23laikJhg1T6ZACcC5cDNBCODxrnzlPCTm+L4EgS wCkAniqjyBFXhIXeXyb0Wbvufkbw68yS =QM3o -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----