[gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Don Davies]

Sigh,

After trying to enlist help in the iRC channel to fix these,
the impression was made that a team meeting had to take
place before bugs could be fixed.  I understand the
underlying principle of not wanting to tread over other 
peoples territory.. but in reality we're talking about typos
and small build fixes.  If these cannot be immediately fixed
and need a developer conference to resolve.. then well..
Good Luck when the portage tree reaches several thousand
packages.  Is there no interest in fixing old stuff or what?

1.  the dev-lang/php/* ebuilds are erroneously referencing
a *specific revision* of freetype-1 in the DEPEND line.  These
lines should have the = replaced with >= or better yet the
new ~ syntax makes sense here.

2.  The exact same bug is present in the media-libs/libgd
ebuild.  It needs to say >= freetype-1-r1 not =freetype-1-r1

The bugs are particulary nasty because the latest -r of freetype-1
in the portage tree is r2, which I had on my system, but 
emerge --pretend php revealed that freetype would be downgraded
to -r1.  Is this not a pretty clear case of a typo? It sure seems like
one to me.

3.  The minicom ebuild in the tree doesnt build complaining of
a bad ko.mo file.  I dont know if gettext-0.10.39 would solve the
problem, but even as of the latest rc6 build image, 0.10.38 is
being used. If somebody will add this quick hack/fix to the
bottom of minicom's src_unpack, it will at least compile and install:

cp po/Makefile po/Makefile.orig
cat po/Makefile.orig | sed -e "s:ko.mo: :" > po/Makefile

4.  The x11-wm/bbkeys ebuild is badly broken.  Im afraid it
needs to be reworked.. some parts are just plain wrong. For
example the part where it tries to use DESTDIR for a Makefile
that doesnt have such a construct.  Its only 1 bin for that part
anyway.  I have a working one, which Ill post to gentoo-ebuild.

Most of this could have been fixed in 5 mins had somebody 
showed interest in doing so.  Instead typos need a formal report?
I dont mean to sound overly sarcastic, but surely we neednt go
though this excercise in order to get a few small bugs tidied up.

Regards
Woodchip

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Joe Bormolini]

On Wed, 15 Aug 2001, Don Davies wrote:

> 4.  The x11-wm/bbkeys ebuild is badly broken.  Im afraid it
> needs to be reworked.. some parts are just plain wrong. For
> example the part where it tries to use DESTDIR for a Makefile
> that doesnt have such a construct.  Its only 1 bin for that part
> anyway.

Okay.... wowza yeah there is some silly stuff in there. Oh well new version
of bbkeys out for a little while now. bbkeysconf is now a seperate source
package. This was my first ebuild way back when ;-) thx for the overdue
heads up

	--lordjoe

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Joe Bormolini]

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Joe Bormolini wrote:
>
> Okay.... wowza yeah there is some silly stuff in there. Oh well new
> version
> of bbkeys out for a little while now. bbkeysconf is now a seperate source
> package. This was my first ebuild way back when ;-) thx for the overdue
> heads up
> 
> 	--lordjoe

Okay they should be fixed now and are in cvs... i added bbkeysconf to
app-misc... i wonder if bbkeys belongs in there with it? I figured it was a
really important part of the wm so i just stuck it in x11-wm but i'm having
second thoughts now - any thoughts?

	--lordjoe

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Dan Armak]

On Wednesday 15 August 2001 10:30, you wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Joe Bormolini wrote:
> > Okay.... wowza yeah there is some silly stuff in there. Oh well new
> > version
> > of bbkeys out for a little while now. bbkeysconf is now a seperate source
> > package. This was my first ebuild way back when ;-) thx for the overdue
> > heads up
> >
> > 	--lordjoe
>
> Okay they should be fixed now and are in cvs... i added bbkeysconf to
> app-misc... i wonder if bbkeys belongs in there with it? I figured it was a
> really important part of the wm so i just stuck it in x11-wm but i'm having
> second thoughts now - any thoughts?

If you decide to move it, join the discussion I'm about to open on the 
desktop team list about moving packages.


-- 


Dan Armak
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team
Matan, Israel

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Daniel Robbins]

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 12:30:36AM -0700, Joe Bormolini wrote:

> Okay they should be fixed now and are in cvs... i added bbkeysconf to
> app-misc... i wonder if bbkeys belongs in there with it? I figured it was a
> really important part of the wm so i just stuck it in x11-wm but i'm having
> second thoughts now - any thoughts?

Any apps directly related to WM configuration can go in x11-wm too.  Also,
mini-apps like dockapps can live in x11-wm as well if there is no other good
place for them.

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins					<drobbins@gentoo.org>
Chief Architect/President			http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.			

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Daniel Robbins]

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 05:09:11AM +0000, Don Davies wrote:

> After trying to enlist help in the iRC channel to fix these, the impression
> was made that a team meeting had to take place before bugs could be fixed.  I
> understand the underlying principle of not wanting to tread over other
> peoples territory.. but in reality we're talking about typos and small build
> fixes.  If these cannot be immediately fixed and need a developer conference
> to resolve.. then well..  Good Luck when the portage tree reaches several
> thousand packages.  Is there no interest in fixing old stuff or what?

Yes, this is totally stupid.  Want a developer account? :)

> Most of this could have been fixed in 5 mins had somebody showed interest in
> doing so.  Instead typos need a formal report?  I dont mean to sound overly
> sarcastic, but surely we neednt go though this excercise in order to get a
> few small bugs tidied up.

You mean you actually care about the quality of our Portage tree?  Seriously,
developers *should not* be letting the new team concept get in the way of
fixing bugs like this.  Chad, if you fix up a desktop package bug, do you think
that Hallski will get upset?  No.  Just email him stating that you made the
fix.  The team concept is *not* intended to create a Debian-style bureaucratic
mess; it's designed to give developers a sense of focus and to encourage *more*
personal responsibility, not less.

Please, if you don't have the time to make some obvious fixes, just say "I'm
busy."  Or if you're too lazy, just say "I'm lazy."  That's OK.  This is a
volunteer project; I really can't complain.  But don't use the new team
organization as an excuse to allow obvious bugs to linger on CVS.

I think the operative rule here is to do unto others as you would like them to
do unto you.  Personally, if someone found an obvious typo or bug in one of
*my* ebuilds, I'd would like them to fix it asap (so that as few people are
adversely affected by it as possible) and then send me a quick email mentioning
the change.

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins					<drobbins@gentoo.org>
Chief Architect/President			http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.			

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Mikael Hallendal]

Den 15 Aug 2001 05:09:11 +0000 skrev Don Davies:
> Sigh,

Hi! :)

> After trying to enlist help in the iRC channel to fix these,
> the impression was made that a team meeting had to take
> place before bugs could be fixed.  I understand the
> underlying principle of not wanting to tread over other 
> peoples territory.. but in reality we're talking about typos
> and small build fixes.  If these cannot be immediately fixed
> and need a developer conference to resolve.. then well..
> Good Luck when the portage tree reaches several thousand
> packages.  Is there no interest in fixing old stuff or what?

Ok, look like you got hold of the wrong guy ...
The team concept shouldn't be "used" like this, it's more to take some
burden from the shoulders of Drobbins and Achim.

Generally I do believe that fixes of this sort is better mailed here
than brough up on IRC. Because for example when there are = and one my
think it should be >= there _might_ be a reason why the developer has
done it this way. I think in those situation it's correct to say that it
should be brought to the developer responsible (or the team) for that
ebuild, therefor it's best to send it to the list.

If the error is of the typo-kinda way like 'fretype instead of freetype'
it should be fixes asap by any developer around, these kind of problems
shouldn't be a problem bringing up on IRC.

This doesn't say you can first try to ask on IRC.

> 1.  the dev-lang/php/* ebuilds are erroneously referencing
> a *specific revision* of freetype-1 in the DEPEND line.  These
> lines should have the = replaced with >= or better yet the
> new ~ syntax makes sense here.

So, does anyone knows why it's = instead of >=? (achim, any special
reason for this). I will for now use ~ instead.

> 2.  The exact same bug is present in the media-libs/libgd
> ebuild.  It needs to say >= freetype-1-r1 not =freetype-1-r1

Since it's here to I get the feeling that it is a reason why it's exact
one version. However there shouldn't be no problem with a later
revision. The ~ syntax is relativly new though and many packages will
probably need to be updated to use this. 

Perhaps it's because of some incompatiblity issues between freetype-1
and freetype-2.
 
> 3.  The minicom ebuild in the tree doesnt build complaining of
> a bad ko.mo file.  I dont know if gettext-0.10.39 would solve the
> problem, but even as of the latest rc6 build image, 0.10.38 is
> being used. If somebody will add this quick hack/fix to the
> bottom of minicom's src_unpack, it will at least compile and install:
> 
> cp po/Makefile po/Makefile.orig
> cat po/Makefile.orig | sed -e "s:ko.mo: :" > po/Makefile

Could someone please test this? (ryan?)
I'll add a todo for this.

> 4.  The x11-wm/bbkeys ebuild is badly broken.  Im afraid it
> needs to be reworked.. some parts are just plain wrong. For
> example the part where it tries to use DESTDIR for a Makefile
> that doesnt have such a construct.  Its only 1 bin for that part
> anyway.  I have a working one, which Ill post to gentoo-ebuild.

>From what I read, lordjoe has fixed this now.

> Most of this could have been fixed in 5 mins had somebody 
> showed interest in doing so.  Instead typos need a formal report?
> I dont mean to sound overly sarcastic, but surely we neednt go
> though this excercise in order to get a few small bugs tidied up.

IRC is a nice medium many times, but not everyone that's in there has
the time to follow it all the time. The answer you recieved is clearly
wrong imho. The answer that whoever you talked to should have given you
should be, "Could you please put this in a mail and send to gentoo-dev
because I haven't got time to look into this right now".

Thanks for the reports (all have been dealt with except for the minicom
which I've added a todo about),

Regards,
  Mikael Hallendal

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[tadpol]

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 01:50:11PM +0000, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
> Generally I do believe that fixes of this sort is better mailed here
> than brough up on IRC. 

not to mention many more of us are read the mailists than join the IRC
channel.

-- 
Michael Tilstra                       tadpol@tadpol.org
Byte your tongue.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Chad M. Huneycutt]

Don Davies wrote:

<woodchip's rant snipped>

<my rant>

Alright, fine!  Point taken.  But both Daniel and Hallski hit on my 
motives for pushing this off.  As Daniel suggests, my proper response 
should have been "Buzz off, woodchip, I am currently helping drobbins 
get rc6 up and running, and I don't have time for minor bug fixes. 
 There are plenty of so-called 'developers' sitting on their asses right 
now who are capable of fixing this"

In my defense, though, as Hallski suggested, the two problems brought to 
my attention were not obvious typos, as woodchip seems to think.  The 
fact that there is a = means that there might be a reason to use it. 
 And the ko.mo issue might point to a larger problem.  As I told 
woodchip, his fixes might only treat the symptom, whereas I would prefer 
someone on the proper team look at it and fix the problem.  If he had 
said, "in the foo ebuild, they typed bar in one place and baz in 
another, when it is obviously supposed to be bar", then I would probably 
have fixed it, or told to him to ask someone else if I was busy.  Then a 
flame would have been appropriate.

I apologize for making it seem like *any* tiny fix should be sent to the 
teams for a vote, but I was only talking about my opinion on those two bugs.

</my rant>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bunch of bugs (nothing major - skip if you're not interested)

[Daniel Robbins]

On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 11:06:26AM -0400, Chad M. Huneycutt wrote:

> In my defense, though, as Hallski suggested, the two problems brought to 
> my attention were not obvious typos, as woodchip seems to think.  The 
> fact that there is a = means that there might be a reason to use it. 
>  And the ko.mo issue might point to a larger problem.  As I told 
> woodchip, his fixes might only treat the symptom, whereas I would prefer 
> someone on the proper team look at it and fix the problem.  If he had 
> said, "in the foo ebuild, they typed bar in one place and baz in 
> another, when it is obviously supposed to be bar", then I would probably 
> have fixed it, or told to him to ask someone else if I was busy.  Then a 
> flame would have been appropriate.
> 
> I apologize for making it seem like *any* tiny fix should be sent to the 
> teams for a vote, but I was only talking about my opinion on those two bugs.

OK; that makes perfect sense.  At the same time, a temporary fix, even if not
addressing the root problem, is often better than no fix at all.  Especially
if ebuilds are dying because of the problem.

-- 
Daniel Robbins					<drobbins@gentoo.org>
Chief Architect/President			http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.