Re: [gentoo-project] Council meeting: Tuesday 11 November 2012, 19:00 UTC

[Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1760 bytes --]

On 09-11-2012 19:42:06 -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
> > They tested it?  Are you referring to the platforms from bug #417451?
> > (excluding the Prefix platforms, because in the Prefix tree
> > gen_usr_ldscript just works, because it breaks existing installs to
> > disable it)
> 
> Look at the first case statement in gen_usr_ldscript and tell me if you
> disagree with what I'm saying. The function always executes on darwin.
> On linux and any bsds, it executes for non-prefix setups. On any other
> platform, prefix or not, it does nothing.
>  
> So, if I'm reading the code correctly, on prefix, more than likely it
> isn't doing anything.

Oh my, I made an error in the logic!  Thanks for pointing out!

> > I thought so too, until I got dangling symlinks for older zlib for some
> > reason (preserve-libs? ebuild?) which wasn't really a funny experience.
> 
> What symlinks did you have?

lib/libz.so.1 -> libz.so.1.2.5
(I upgraded 1.2.5 to 1.2.7)

> If we do this with a variable, I suggest using it temporarily, but
> ultimately dropping it and having everyone switch over after things are tested.

We know that FreeBSD will never (for how it looks now) follow, so we
need to keep the code anyway.  Since it breaks e.g. Darwin, I'd like not
to disappoint my users by saying: "sorry, you'll have to reinstall".
Last but not least, I see no reason (given we have to keep the code
anyway) to make sysadmins, that feel unsure about this on their running
production systems, go into this route.  You don't know what custom code
they have installed/running.  They'll be on their own (no
udev/GNOME/whatever support), but most likely they won't care about that
at all.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]