[gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Mark Knecht]

I love my Gentoo-devs, but what is the train of thought here?
skype-2.2.0.35-r1 was ~amd64 yesterday. It's installed and working
fine. Today 2.2.0.35-r99 is ~amd64, which is perfectly fine, but
they've completely removed -r1 and now I'm required to unmask
emulation packages that only came out today? That doesn't seem quite
right...

Why did they completely get rid of -r1? That should stick around for a
little while after -r99 becomes ~amd64, shouldn't it?

- Mark


c2stable ~ # eix -I skype
[U] net-im/skype
     Available versions:  (~)2.2.0.35-r99^ms {{pax_kernel qt-static}}
     Installed versions:  2.2.0.35-r1^ms{tbz2}(06:37:28 AM
02/29/2012)(-pax_kernel -qt-static)
     Homepage:            http://www.skype.com/
     Description:         An P2P Internet Telephony (VoiceIP) client

c2stable ~ # emerge -pvDuN @world

These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20120520
[20120127] USE="-development" 33,929 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-db-20120520 [20120127]
USE="-development" 1,775 kB
[ebuild     U  ] sys-apps/baselayout-2.1-r1 [2.0.3] USE="-build" 40 kB
[ebuild     U  ] virtual/perl-Time-Local-1.200.0-r2 [1.200.0-r1] 0 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-opengl-20120520
[20120127] USE="-development" 35,461 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs-20120520
[20120127] USE="opengl -development" 2,375 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520
[20120127] USE="-development" 5,973 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520
[20120127] USE="-development" 10,200 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520
[20120127] USE="alsa -development -pulseaudio" 6,942 kB
[ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-qtlibs-20120520
[20120127] USE="-development" 16,618 kB
[ebuild     U ~] net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99 [2.2.0.35-r1]
USE="-pax_kernel -qt-static" 0 kB

Total: 11 packages (11 upgrades), Size of downloads: 113,308 kB

The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
#required by net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99[-qt-static], required by
@selected, required by @world (argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-qtlibs-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs-20120520, required by
app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520, required by
app-text/acroread-9.5.1, required by @selected, required by @world
(argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520, required
by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520, required by
net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99, required by @selected, required by @world
(argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520, required
by net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99, required by @selected, required by
@world (argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520, required
by app-text/acroread-9.5.1, required by @selected, required by @world
(argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-opengl-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520, required
by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-qtlibs-20120520, required by
net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99[-qt-static], required by @selected, required
by @world (argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-text/acroread-9.5.1, required by @selected, required
by @world (argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520 ~amd64
#required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520, required
by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520, required by
net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99, required by @selected, required by @world
(argument)
=app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-db-20120520 ~amd64
c2stable ~ #

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Markos Chandras]

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> I love my Gentoo-devs, but what is the train of thought here?
> skype-2.2.0.35-r1 was ~amd64 yesterday. It's installed and working
> fine. Today 2.2.0.35-r99 is ~amd64, which is perfectly fine, but
> they've completely removed -r1 and now I'm required to unmask
> emulation packages that only came out today? That doesn't seem quite
> right...
>
> Why did they completely get rid of -r1? That should stick around for a
> little while after -r99 becomes ~amd64, shouldn't it?
>
> - Mark
>
>
> c2stable ~ # eix -I skype
> [U] net-im/skype
>     Available versions:  (~)2.2.0.35-r99^ms {{pax_kernel qt-static}}
>     Installed versions:  2.2.0.35-r1^ms{tbz2}(06:37:28 AM
> 02/29/2012)(-pax_kernel -qt-static)
>     Homepage:            http://www.skype.com/
>     Description:         An P2P Internet Telephony (VoiceIP) client
>
> c2stable ~ # emerge -pvDuN @world
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20120520
> [20120127] USE="-development" 33,929 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-db-20120520 [20120127]
> USE="-development" 1,775 kB
> [ebuild     U  ] sys-apps/baselayout-2.1-r1 [2.0.3] USE="-build" 40 kB
> [ebuild     U  ] virtual/perl-Time-Local-1.200.0-r2 [1.200.0-r1] 0 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-opengl-20120520
> [20120127] USE="-development" 35,461 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs-20120520
> [20120127] USE="opengl -development" 2,375 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520
> [20120127] USE="-development" 5,973 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520
> [20120127] USE="-development" 10,200 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520
> [20120127] USE="alsa -development -pulseaudio" 6,942 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-qtlibs-20120520
> [20120127] USE="-development" 16,618 kB
> [ebuild     U ~] net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99 [2.2.0.35-r1]
> USE="-pax_kernel -qt-static" 0 kB
>
> Total: 11 packages (11 upgrades), Size of downloads: 113,308 kB
>
> The following keyword changes are necessary to proceed:
> #required by net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99[-qt-static], required by
> @selected, required by @world (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-qtlibs-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs-20120520, required by
> app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520, required by
> app-text/acroread-9.5.1, required by @selected, required by @world
> (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520, required
> by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520, required by
> net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99, required by @selected, required by @world
> (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-xlibs-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520, required
> by net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99, required by @selected, required by
> @world (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520, required
> by app-text/acroread-9.5.1, required by @selected, required by @world
> (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-opengl-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520, required
> by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-qtlibs-20120520, required by
> net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99[-qt-static], required by @selected, required
> by @world (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-text/acroread-9.5.1, required by @selected, required
> by @world (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-gtklibs-20120520 ~amd64
> #required by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-medialibs-20120520, required
> by app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-soundlibs-20120520, required by
> net-im/skype-2.2.0.35-r99, required by @selected, required by @world
> (argument)
> =app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-db-20120520 ~amd64
> c2stable ~ #
>

-r1 had a security problem. You should unmask the emulation packages
and continue the update process. Look at the ChangeLog so see what
changed. Both versions are ~amd64 so I don't understand your complain
about keeping -r1 in the tree for a while.

Markos

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I love my Gentoo-devs, but what is the train of thought here?
>> skype-2.2.0.35-r1 was ~amd64 yesterday. It's installed and working
>> fine. Today 2.2.0.35-r99 is ~amd64, which is perfectly fine, but
>> they've completely removed -r1 and now I'm required to unmask
>> emulation packages that only came out today? That doesn't seem quite
>> right...
>>
>> Why did they completely get rid of -r1? That should stick around for a
>> little while after -r99 becomes ~amd64, shouldn't it?
>>
>> - Mark
<SNIP>
>
> -r1 had a security problem. You should unmask the emulation packages
> and continue the update process. Look at the ChangeLog so see what
> changed. Both versions are ~amd64 so I don't understand your complain
> about keeping -r1 in the tree for a while.
>
> Markos
>

Thanks Markos. That's likely what I'll do, although the alternative
I'm looking at for now is possibly getting -r1 from an overlay.

I didn't think I was _complaining_. I was just asking what the train
of thought was that leads them to do this sort of thing. Everything in
the world has a security problem. We know they are either found or not
found. Unmasking 8 emulation libraries that have _yesterdays_ date in
their names, and therefore makes them quite new, may:

1) Create more security problems

2) Create issues with other programs that use the libraries.

Anyway, thanks for the response. I'll either unmask or use an overlay.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Markos Chandras]

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I love my Gentoo-devs, but what is the train of thought here?
>>> skype-2.2.0.35-r1 was ~amd64 yesterday. It's installed and working
>>> fine. Today 2.2.0.35-r99 is ~amd64, which is perfectly fine, but
>>> they've completely removed -r1 and now I'm required to unmask
>>> emulation packages that only came out today? That doesn't seem quite
>>> right...
>>>
>>> Why did they completely get rid of -r1? That should stick around for a
>>> little while after -r99 becomes ~amd64, shouldn't it?
>>>
>>> - Mark
> <SNIP>
>>
>> -r1 had a security problem. You should unmask the emulation packages
>> and continue the update process. Look at the ChangeLog so see what
>> changed. Both versions are ~amd64 so I don't understand your complain
>> about keeping -r1 in the tree for a while.
>>
>> Markos
>>
>
> Thanks Markos. That's likely what I'll do, although the alternative
> I'm looking at for now is possibly getting -r1 from an overlay.
>
> I didn't think I was _complaining_. I was just asking what the train
> of thought was that leads them to do this sort of thing. Everything in
> the world has a security problem. We know they are either found or not
> found. Unmasking 8 emulation libraries that have _yesterdays_ date in
> their names, and therefore makes them quite new, may:
>
> 1) Create more security problems
>
> 2) Create issues with other programs that use the libraries.
>
> Anyway, thanks for the response. I'll either unmask or use an overlay.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>

Well, based on my experience, the emul-* packages are rather safe to
use so it should not be a problem to unmask them. Otherwise, you can
always grab -r1 from http://sources.gentoo.org and keep it in a local
overlay

Markos

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am Montag, 21. Mai 2012, 08:55:25 schrieb Mark Knecht:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> 
wrote:
> > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I love my Gentoo-devs, but what is the train of thought here?
> >> skype-2.2.0.35-r1 was ~amd64 yesterday. It's installed and working
> >> fine. Today 2.2.0.35-r99 is ~amd64, which is perfectly fine, but
> >> they've completely removed -r1 and now I'm required to unmask
> >> emulation packages that only came out today? That doesn't seem quite
> >> right...
> >> 
> >> Why did they completely get rid of -r1? That should stick around for a
> >> little while after -r99 becomes ~amd64, shouldn't it?
> >> 
> >> - Mark
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
> > -r1 had a security problem. You should unmask the emulation packages
> > and continue the update process. Look at the ChangeLog so see what
> > changed. Both versions are ~amd64 so I don't understand your complain
> > about keeping -r1 in the tree for a while.
> > 
> > Markos
> 
> Thanks Markos. That's likely what I'll do, although the alternative
> I'm looking at for now is possibly getting -r1 from an overlay.
> 
> I didn't think I was _complaining_. I was just asking what the train
> of thought was that leads them to do this sort of thing. Everything in
> the world has a security problem. 

well, apart from this being not true at all. It is just stupid to keep a known 
BAD version in a TESTING tree.

> We know they are either found or not
> found. Unmasking 8 emulation libraries that have _yesterdays_ date in
> their names, and therefore makes them quite new, may:

new for their compilation. Not the code inside.
> 
> 1) Create more security problems

may, but it fixes a KNOWN problem.

> 
> 2) Create issues with other programs that use the libraries.

which are.. none?

> 
> Anyway, thanks for the response. I'll either unmask or use an overlay.

if you use testing, you have to deal with such kind of situations. Using a 
known broken version is just stupid.
There isn't a choice between those two. There is only a choice between: use 
unstable or stable.
And if you use unstable, don't complain about things being fluid.

-- 
#163933

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 05/21/2012 05:10 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> Am Montag, 21. Mai 2012, 08:55:25 schrieb Mark Knecht:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Markos Chandras
>> <hwoarang@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht
>>> <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I love my Gentoo-devs, but what is the train of thought
>>>> here? skype-2.2.0.35-r1 was ~amd64 yesterday. It's installed
>>>> and working fine. Today 2.2.0.35-r99 is ~amd64, which is
>>>> perfectly fine, but they've completely removed -r1 and now
>>>> I'm required to unmask emulation packages that only came out
>>>> today? That doesn't seem quite right...
>>>> 
>>>> Why did they completely get rid of -r1? That should stick
>>>> around for a little while after -r99 becomes ~amd64,
>>>> shouldn't it?
>>>> 
>>>> - Mark
>> 
>> <SNIP>
>> 
>>> -r1 had a security problem. You should unmask the emulation
>>> packages and continue the update process. Look at the ChangeLog
>>> so see what changed. Both versions are ~amd64 so I don't
>>> understand your complain about keeping -r1 in the tree for a
>>> while.
>>> 
>>> Markos
>> 
>> Thanks Markos. That's likely what I'll do, although the
>> alternative I'm looking at for now is possibly getting -r1 from
>> an overlay.
>> 
>> I didn't think I was _complaining_. I was just asking what the
>> train of thought was that leads them to do this sort of thing.
>> Everything in the world has a security problem.
> 
> well, apart from this being not true at all. It is just stupid to
> keep a known BAD version in a TESTING tree.
> 
>> We know they are either found or not found. Unmasking 8 emulation
>> libraries that have _yesterdays_ date in their names, and
>> therefore makes them quite new, may:
> 
> new for their compilation. Not the code inside.
>> 
>> 1) Create more security problems
> 
> may, but it fixes a KNOWN problem.
> 
>> 
>> 2) Create issues with other programs that use the libraries.
> 
> which are.. none?
> 
>> 
>> Anyway, thanks for the response. I'll either unmask or use an
>> overlay.
> 
> if you use testing, you have to deal with such kind of situations.
> Using a known broken version is just stupid. There isn't a choice
> between those two. There is only a choice between: use unstable or
> stable. And if you use unstable, don't complain about things being
> fluid.
> 
- From what I can tell, he is not using ~amd64 (testing). He uses a
mixed system (stable with a few packages in package.keywords) which
sometimes is even worse :)

The best way to deal with your problem (and avoid seeing your
package.keywords getting bigger and bigger) is to grab -r1, mark it
stable, put it in your local overlay and keep using that indefinitely.

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
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=+5ZX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
<SNIP>
>> if you use testing, you have to deal with such kind of situations.
>> Using a known broken version is just stupid. There isn't a choice
>> between those two. There is only a choice between: use unstable or
>> stable. And if you use unstable, don't complain about things being
>> fluid.
>>

Typical Volker. Not worth a response.

> - From what I can tell, he is not using ~amd64 (testing). He uses a
> mixed system (stable with a few packages in package.keywords) which
> sometimes is even worse :)
>

That's it precisely. All my systems are 'stable' as best they can be.
The only things that are more or less permanently testing are portage
& eix.  After that the only entries in package.keywords are specific
applications or _very_ targeted things that address hardware issues.
(Virtualbox, VMWare Player, nvidia-drivers) That's it. In general, the
only reason ANYTHING goes in package.keywords is to address a
temporary package problem, and typically they aren't there that long.
For instance, if say Virtualbox had a problem I might keyword it for a
month or two to get a new release that fixes the problem. After that
version goes stable I remove the keyword entry and am running the same
version I've been running. My keyword file is currently only about 12
lines.

In the case of skype there was no stable version to use. Everything is
marked as testing.

While I agree that the emulation libraries are probably low risk I
don't want to add 8 new things to package.keywords. It's just not the
way I work here.

> The best way to deal with your problem (and avoid seeing your
> package.keywords getting bigger and bigger) is to grab -r1, mark it
> stable, put it in your local overlay and keep using that indefinitely.
>

Yeah, most likely the best medium-term solution although what I've
done for now is emerge -C skype.

> - --
> Regards,
> Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2


Thanks Markos! I really appreciate your inputs as well as all the work
you guys do. We don't say thanks enough.

(Ugh Volker. Keep the attitude to yourself dude) ;-(

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

Am Montag, 21. Mai 2012, 10:54:08 schrieb Mark Knecht:
> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org>
> wrote: <SNIP>
> 
> >> if you use testing, you have to deal with such kind of situations.
> >> Using a known broken version is just stupid. There isn't a choice
> >> between those two. There is only a choice between: use unstable or
> >> stable. And if you use unstable, don't complain about things being
> >> fluid.
> 
> Typical Volker. Not worth a response.
> 
> > - From what I can tell, he is not using ~amd64 (testing). He uses a
> > mixed system (stable with a few packages in package.keywords) which
> > sometimes is even worse :)
> 
> That's it precisely. All my systems are 'stable' as best they can be.
> The only things that are more or less permanently testing are portage
> & eix.  After that the only entries in package.keywords are specific
> applications or _very_ targeted things that address hardware issues.
> (Virtualbox, VMWare Player, nvidia-drivers) That's it. In general, the
> only reason ANYTHING goes in package.keywords is to address a
> temporary package problem, and typically they aren't there that long.
> For instance, if say Virtualbox had a problem I might keyword it for a
> month or two to get a new release that fixes the problem. After that
> version goes stable I remove the keyword entry and am running the same
> version I've been running. My keyword file is currently only about 12
> lines.
> 
> In the case of skype there was no stable version to use. Everything is
> marked as testing.
> 
> While I agree that the emulation libraries are probably low risk I
> don't want to add 8 new things to package.keywords. It's just not the
> way I work here.
> 
> > The best way to deal with your problem (and avoid seeing your
> > package.keywords getting bigger and bigger) is to grab -r1, mark it
> > stable, put it in your local overlay and keep using that indefinitely.
> 
> Yeah, most likely the best medium-term solution although what I've
> done for now is emerge -C skype.
> 
> > - --
> > Regards,
> > Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
> 
> Thanks Markos! I really appreciate your inputs as well as all the work
> you guys do. We don't say thanks enough.
> 
> (Ugh Volker. Keep the attitude to yourself dude) ;-(
> 

which attitude?

you are the one using a testing package - and then contemplates to use a KNOWN 
BAD version for no good reason at all. And then YOU call me out?

Please...


-- 
#163933