On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 08:36:12AM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 30-09-2012 14:47:17 -0700, Brian Harring wrote: > > > In the worst case it returns "Bad marshalling data". > > > > Examples wanted for this. If this occurs, that's a python bug- one > > exception... portage (figures). They install into a non > > /usr/lib/python* location, meaning the .pyc/.pyo from py2.6 is > > exposed/accessed for py2.7 for example. > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=300922 > > I doubt whether it's a Python bug, we have to mess with the files. But > then again, I did some toying, and it seems Python doesn't care about > this (any more?).
Well, offhand that bug is pre EAPI3 (eapi3 was approved 01/18/10, and adoption was slow- lot of people skipped straight to eapi4) - so the mtime wouldn't have been guaranteed preserved for a long while. Meaning the bugs data I don't trust to be relevant due to timing, and age. As you said, this needs revisiting- minimally, portage is screwing around contents there, and I don't trust the python eclass to /not/ be forcing a compileall after the fact anyways. Suggest backing down the various protections for a full test, and resuming that bug- if you can replicate it, I'm definitely interested (dealt with this when it occurred for 2.3->2.4 for example). ~harring
