Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-19 Thread Jim Ramsay
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 07:28:40PM +0200, Markus Hauschild wrote: > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Mike Auty wrote: > > Ideally, these calls should either adhere to FEATURES="-preserve-libs", > > or there should be a tool that can identify which files portage has > > preserved, and allow easy r

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-15 Thread Markus Hauschild
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Mike Auty wrote: > Ideally, these calls should either adhere to FEATURES="-preserve-libs", > or there should be a tool that can identify which files portage has > preserved, and allow easy rebuilding of dependent packages, and removal. >  At the moment, I'm having

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-15 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
Le jeudi 15 juillet 2010 à 09:49 +0100, Mike Auty a écrit : [...] > I can live with this for in places where it causes massive breakage > (openssl/libpng/libjpg), because it's genuinely useful, but I think it > should be restricted to such important packages, or at least disabled by > FEATURES="-pr

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-15 Thread Mike Auty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sorry I'm a bit late to the thread, Just to add that empathy preserves libemapthy in this manner too. On 05/07/10 17:40, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > > 1. How is it different than preserved-libs feature from > portage-2.2 ? The issue

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-05 Thread Gilles Dartiguelongue
Le vendredi 02 juillet 2010 à 08:51 +0300, Samuli Suominen a écrit : > I've recently stumbled upon several packages unnecessarily using old > preserve_old_lib feature from eutils.eclass, namely: > > libgnomekbd > libproxy > > And then users hit issues like this: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-02 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Friday, July 02, 2010 01:51:25 Samuli Suominen wrote: > I've recently stumbled upon several packages unnecessarily using old > preserve_old_lib feature from eutils.eclass, namely: > > libgnomekbd > libproxy > > And then users hit issues like this: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-01 Thread Samuli Suominen
On 07/02/2010 09:03 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 07/02/2010 08:54 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> On 7/2/10 7:51 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: >>> It's a hack, not a solution >> >> Should we make repoman issue a warning about it? >> >> It already warns about using make -j1 as a workaround for ups

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-01 Thread Samuli Suominen
On 07/02/2010 08:54 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 7/2/10 7:51 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: >> It's a hack, not a solution > > Should we make repoman issue a warning about it? > > It already warns about using make -j1 as a workaround for upstream > issues. The new warning could be on the same

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-01 Thread Samuli Suominen
On 07/02/2010 08:51 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > I've recently stumbled upon several packages unnecessarily using old > preserve_old_lib feature from eutils.eclass, namely: > > libgnomekbd > libproxy > > And then users hit issues like this: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326517#c5 >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-01 Thread Paweł Hajdan, Jr.
On 7/2/10 7:51 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > It's a hack, not a solution Should we make repoman issue a warning about it? It already warns about using make -j1 as a workaround for upstream issues. The new warning could be on the same level (yellow, not red). Paweł signature.asc Description: Op

[gentoo-dev] Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that

2010-07-01 Thread Samuli Suominen
I've recently stumbled upon several packages unnecessarily using old preserve_old_lib feature from eutils.eclass, namely: libgnomekbd libproxy And then users hit issues like this: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326517#c5 Please only use the preserve_old_lib function in case of breaking