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. -- #163933
