From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SWWCy-0002na-Rk for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 21 May 2012 17:15:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7904BE0C8A; Mon, 21 May 2012 17:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ey0-f181.google.com (mail-ey0-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56C47E0CA5 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 17:13:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eaae12 with SMTP id e12so1429744eaa.40 for ; Mon, 21 May 2012 10:13:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=dGrR3p6d2ob0sZ1TuMcBB8dUvR991zbEyfcgsSdZbog=; b=G4IoK5NDVaCxSrpH2LyoSpG1H94x2YWi3WR/rEKdOoZJFpuozSfabPeY9I+P9Xr/57 KorXSG0NdYZnE/Ar2C5PhLXS4Y2tgKkh7MD1k3jhU3Edad2AY4XClQ3jAMhrPA0CYM7o aHFJumPQkkN8qiCioxo1GoA/hy5WbcNkt8wboiCdqTpZXKhofiuakbRjMdafWUHnvRgR g79uVnrgNvNvZdZU026SN5crghqjdxtyDj8nOSAEkwRQp9SXs+FMgivGmFsU+KIvMXda wOsVo2vNSy6uqoHeOYQTTsoubGhOmdCSXldgwHDpW7Mp0ukGf3jIZzZIn+zkWB6VNzul IYNQ== Received: by 10.213.20.201 with SMTP id g9mr4534113ebb.72.1337620401380; Mon, 21 May 2012 10:13:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.72] (93-97-149-234.zone5.bethere.co.uk. [93.97.149.234]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q53sm93074057eef.8.2012.05.21.10.13.19 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 21 May 2012 10:13:20 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Markos Chandras Message-ID: <4FBA77AA.6080307@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 18:13:14 +0100 From: Markos Chandras User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120420 Thunderbird/12.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] skype package changes I don't understand References: <2917245.cGtGWNT36e@energy> In-Reply-To: <2917245.cGtGWNT36e@energy> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 51092358-f8d7-4233-8db6-de3153c8d39e X-Archives-Hash: 718ada89a9035f7a0e9fa25839740829 -----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 >> > wrote: >>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht >>> 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 >> >> >> >>> -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) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJPuneqAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LC538QAJNaPIa0BSCh67//wIXgXYbX pi231wBAhc0yGxfIcfXiNJBvTD5D08AAFhswoHHMer6/H1+NHKaeF8MnNmpt+41W FHRj5bG/30uhgD0thb6tmZ78GEWMOkRxPtv0jPQk0Y2YIkI9RYk3eYkgqD2MVbJz XJfI5HWpOB5Eh3fiNJkzc5mW2bdPLm0dFS5dmkKtVclM7bI4DJ42Gwk9pOgJ+T+H ciGPQt4NvqqXf94pV5LVXej9+93pTlNA4QvtSE1Io1T2srHrO5/3KE5t1QF6eht1 odSJMID+hZ7ViOIRxK1a453sAzO8rK1SZJhoKzYFhPonQq/VFymU/sGcap2gU3Y1 FQKVeb10nZdAT3v2dw8DaqGnxJHdWcbwRaJOy6M28vdDnOvFBwZYzFn5zTugwHr7 Gcd/buQ6yCtWvUUO/QtgkIgGVewxE5QdQ7Pn3ytt+j3wIQV9QVs46dEUy/rOc5FU deibghpnTYy1vn3uT5sLsDHlvWtE2XIonowPeBRcQmQJeo9snqIf2WBCn3ExiWym 7Bj0iHVbnEQcdWnIuRiK5sR5eSi+lJv/1Z+xwH98lFXGyX8jM6501W9ZZRBxwMoA mbCv+RmHfMKUwHhVrdk4qmI/McgDN6DFkS1I/fHaa/mQ0ImDh5U9CahxvvsVz9s+ iV17+9hETK1TAMP9G2yb =+5ZX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----