Re: [gentoo-dev] About tests needing internet connection to run

2012-07-07 Thread Alexandre Rostovtsev
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > To be honest, I think the first thing to do would be fixing the test > suites to skip tests which fail due to internet connection being > unavailable. Well, there would still be question how to reliably > determine that... For some packages,

Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue

2012-07-07 Thread Zac Medico
On 07/07/2012 11:54 AM, Peter Stuge wrote: > Ian Stakenvicius wrote: >>> Is it unrealistic to assume that upstream ABI providers will mark >>> their ABIs by using sonames correctly? >>> >>> Maybe that is at least the common case, then ABI_SLOT could be set >>> automatically. >> >> Although we hav

Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue

2012-07-07 Thread Peter Stuge
Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > > Is it unrealistic to assume that upstream ABI providers will mark > > their ABIs by using sonames correctly? > > > > Maybe that is at least the common case, then ABI_SLOT could be set > > automatically. > > Although we have a lot of this information available (which

Re: [gentoo-dev] About tests needing internet connection to run

2012-07-07 Thread Michał Górny
On Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:38:59 +0200 Pacho Ramos wrote: > After reading: > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424719 > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397973 > > Looks like there is not consensus about how to handle this cases, > probably a PROPERTIES variable for this would help :-/

Re: [gentoo-dev] About tests needing internet connection to run

2012-07-07 Thread Kent Fredric
On 8 July 2012 00:38, Pacho Ramos wrote: > After reading: > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424719 > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397973 > > Looks like there is not consensus about how to handle this cases, > probably a PROPERTIES variable for this would help :-/ > > Any ideas o

Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue

2012-07-07 Thread Ian Stakenvicius
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 07/07/12 07:29 AM, Peter Stuge wrote: > Zac Medico wrote: >>> I'd suggest a special ebuild phase to check for ABI >>> changes, like the pre_pkg_preinst_abi_check phase >>> suggested here: >>> >>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_b

Re: [gentoo-dev] Default hash algorithm for Manifest signing

2012-07-07 Thread Chema Alonso
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 05:32:22PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > Hi all, > ... > > However, I remember that there used to be some problems with SHA256 > and DSA keys. Before we add "--digest-algo SHA256" to the default > PORTAGE_GPG_SIGNING_COMMAND in make.globals, I'd like to ask for > feedback

[gentoo-dev] About tests needing internet connection to run

2012-07-07 Thread Pacho Ramos
After reading: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424719 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=397973 Looks like there is not consensus about how to handle this cases, probably a PROPERTIES variable for this would help :-/ Any ideas on this kind of issue? signature.asc Description: This

Re: [gentoo-dev] About forcing rebuilds of other packages issue

2012-07-07 Thread Peter Stuge
Zac Medico wrote: > > I'd suggest a special ebuild phase to check for ABI changes, like > > the pre_pkg_preinst_abi_check phase suggested here: > > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=192319#c20 > > I guess, that phase would detect ABI change and package manager >

Re: [gentoo-dev] About trying to prevent downgrades of packages that cause system breakage

2012-07-07 Thread Ralph Sennhauser
On Sat, 30 Jun 2012 13:01:52 -0700 Zac Medico wrote: > On 06/30/2012 12:42 PM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote: > > That might be neat, but it would already help if you had to add > > --allow-downgrades or similar to emerge in case Portage wants to > > downgrade one or more packages. > > Besides preventin