On 10/13/14 12:58, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
I've got two obsolete packages masked currently: app-text/unix2dos and
app-doc/djbdns-man. Both of them block other stable packages,
app-text/dos2unix and net-dns/djbdns respectively.
Fortunately, both of them have had version/revision bumps since the
blocker so we can remove the blocker from the newer ebuild and then
stabilize that, at which point there's no problem. But I wonder, what
would be the best way to handle the situation if no version/revision
bump had occurred?
In other words, suppose that net-dns/djbdns-1.05-r30 didn't exist. In
-r29, I have,
KEYWORDS="alpha amd64 hppa ~mips ppc ppc64 sparc x86"
DEPEND="!app-doc/djbdns-man"
and app-doc/djbdns-man is now hard masked. Suppose I remove djbdns-man
from the tree -- what do I do about the blocker? I see a couple of options:
a) Edit the stable ebuild with ones fingers crossed
b) Do a revbump and wait it out
c) Do a revbump and file a stablereq immediately
d) Do nothing, will repoman tolerate that?
(b) is obviously safest, but (c) seems reasonable as well all things
considered. Will the answer change when portage drops dynamic deps?
You might be okay with rev bumping then then stabilizing yourself on the
arches since the package has been already tested on them. The rev bump
doesn't change any files on the system but just gets past the blocker.
I don't want to speak for all arch teams, but I would be okay with that
on the arches I take care of: arm, ppc, ppc64. In other words, go with
C and do the stablereq yourself.
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail : bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
