-----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 >> <hwoar...@gentoo.org> > wrote: >>> On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Mark Knecht >>> <markkne...@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) 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-----
