First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 169772
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: NEW
Resolution:
Assigned To: Gentoo Quality Assistance Team <qa@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: Ivan Iakoupov <voxiac@gmail.com>
Add CC:
CC:
Remove selected CCs
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
fvwm-crystal-3.0.4.diff Diff file patch Ivan Iakoupov 2007-03-07 14:45 0000 134 bytes Details | Diff
bug169772.patch devmanual patch patch Mark Loeser 2008-01-15 01:49 0000 966 bytes Details | Diff
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 169772 depends on: 207768 207770 207772 207773 207774 207775 207776 207778 207780 207781 207782 207784 207786 207788 207789 207791 207792 207794 207796 207798 207799 207801 Show dependency tree
Show dependency graph
Bug 169772 blocks: 177874
Votes: 0    Show votes for this bug    Vote for this bug

Additional Comments: (this is where you put emerge --info)









View Bug Activity   |   Format For Printing   |   XML   |   Clone This Bug


Description:   Opened: 2007-03-07 14:43 0000
After one of the elog lines states:
"They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.gz."
However on my system that file is compressed with .bz2 instead
So maybe that line should be:
"They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.bz2"?

Reproducible: Always

------- Comment #1 From Ivan Iakoupov 2007-03-07 14:45:32 0000 -------
Created an attachment (id=112420) [edit]
Diff file

------- Comment #2 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-07 14:45:42 0000 -------
man make.conf / PORTAGE_COMPRESS

------- Comment #3 From UncleOwen 2007-03-07 14:59:02 0000 -------
So what? The message is still wrong.

------- Comment #4 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-07 15:38:33 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #3)
> So what? The message is still wrong.

So what? It will be *still* wrong after you 'fix' it and you set
PORTAGE_COMPRESS="gzip" 

------- Comment #5 From UncleOwen 2007-03-07 16:12:21 0000 -------
Exactly. Now that we've established that - how about a real solution?

------- Comment #6 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-07 16:13:59 0000 -------
Like, use your brain/common sense? Thanks.

------- Comment #7 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-08 09:00:55 0000 -------
*** Bug 169874 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #8 From Ivan Iakoupov 2007-03-10 14:33:01 0000 -------
Hm, I don't even have that varible set in my make.conf (I do have bzip2 USE
flag however)
Ok, if one cannot do something smart like:

elog "They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.${DOC_EXTENSION}."

then what about adding the line:
"NOTE: docs could also be compressed with bzip2"
or something like that.
Then not so experienced users like me will not bug you anymore with this issue
(I see there's already a similiar bug)

------- Comment #9 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-10 16:00:50 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> elog "They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.${DOC_EXTENSION}."

Talk about over-engineering...

------- Comment #10 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-14 20:52:51 0000 -------
*** Bug 170939 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #11 From Jakub Moc 2007-03-27 16:13:13 0000 -------
*** Bug 172427 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #12 From Paul Healy 2007-03-27 18:10:54 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > elog "They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.${DOC_EXTENSION}."
> 
> Talk about over-engineering...

# find /usr/portage/ -name '*.ebuild' | xargs egrep -l
'einfo.*share.*gz|elog.*share.*gz'|wc -l
196
#

Lots of potential for duplicate bug reports there.

Some options:
 a) DOC_EXTENSION/over-engineered fix - but only complete fix?
 b) have einfo|elog regsub their arguments - quick hack, complete fix
impossible
 c) leave as is - untidy, possible version skew indication
 d) teach gunzip bz2 - :)

------- Comment #13 From Jakub Moc 2007-04-04 07:21:34 0000 -------
*** Bug 173160 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #14 From Ɓukasz Damentko 2007-04-30 13:32:31 0000 -------
*** Bug 176564 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #15 From Marijn Schouten 2007-04-30 13:49:26 0000 -------
reopening to reassign

------- Comment #16 From Marijn Schouten 2007-04-30 13:53:52 0000 -------
Changing severity to normal, since these are not just typos, but documentation
errors.

------- Comment #17 From Marius Mauch 2007-04-30 16:31:19 0000 -------
How about just using wildcards:
elog "They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL."*
(assuming we're talking about postinst)

------- Comment #18 From SpanKY 2007-04-30 17:11:29 0000 -------
too much overhead for any of these solutions ...

just rewrite the message to not explicitly include the full path:
"They are listed in the INSTALL file in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/"

------- Comment #19 From Jakub Moc 2007-06-01 21:22:42 0000 -------
*** Bug 180594 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #20 From Jakub Moc 2007-07-22 16:14:29 0000 -------
*** Bug 186242 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #21 From Jakub Moc 2007-07-24 20:20:17 0000 -------
*** Bug 186511 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #22 From Martin von Gagern 2007-07-24 20:35:49 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #21)
> *** Bug 186511 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

I'm a bit surprised using ".../INSTALL$(ecompress --suffix)" hasn't occured
here yet. Anyone thought of that? If so, any reason for not using this? Could
there still be portage versions out there that don't have ecompress? In that
case you could use ".../INSTALL$(ecompress --suffix 2>/dev/null || echo .gz)".
Note that the latest ecompress does cache the suffix, so the overhead will be
negligible.

------- Comment #23 From SpanKY 2007-07-25 04:27:34 0000 -------
or just make it read "the INSTALL file in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/"

people arent retarded, they can tab complete

------- Comment #24 From Jakub Moc 2007-08-17 00:22:55 0000 -------
*** Bug 189178 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #25 From Jakub Moc 2007-09-04 01:19:00 0000 -------
*** Bug 185990 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #26 From Torsten Rehn 2007-09-04 21:01:28 0000 -------
Maybe this should be added to the "writing ebuilds" docs somewhere. I think it
would be best to not reference the complete path and filename explicitly, but
rather describe it's location (as vapier suggested in comment #23). Why don't
we make this policy and close this bug? 

I understand jakub saying that this is really not worth the overhead it caused,
but pointing users to a file that doesn't exist just feels wrong from a QA
point of view, even if the correct filename can be found easily.

------- Comment #27 From Jakub Moc 2007-10-13 07:41:40 0000 -------
*** Bug 195678 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #28 From Jakub Moc 2007-11-22 13:41:25 0000 -------
*** Bug 199982 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #29 From Jakub Moc 2007-12-16 19:33:24 0000 -------
*** Bug 202506 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #30 From Mark Loeser 2008-01-09 03:01:55 0000 -------
Okay, so is the Portage team saying that this is too much of a pain and with
little gain to add in the ${ECOMPRESS_EXTENSION} or whatever we want to call
it?  If that's the case, is everyone in agreement that we will just tell people
the directory to look for the files?  "The INSTALL file can be found in
/usr/share/i_like_penguins/" ?  If so, then I'll go ahead and start getting
something done about this.  I just want to be sure of what everyone's position
is before I do anything.  Thanks

------- Comment #31 From SpanKY 2008-01-09 07:01:09 0000 -------
yes, rewrite the message

------- Comment #32 From Mark Loeser 2008-01-15 01:49:24 0000 -------
Created an attachment (id=140959) [edit]
devmanual patch

How does this sound for documentation on devmanual?

------- Comment #33 From SpanKY 2008-01-15 02:26:46 0000 -------
looks sexy, thanks

------- Comment #34 From Samuli Suominen 2008-01-19 10:39:42 0000 -------
Is using `ecompress --suffix` to find out extension for manpages entirely wrong
then? I needed this for media-gfx/xloadimage and media-gfx/xli for
update_alternatives to symlink manpages correctly. 

If this is wrong, please provide a alternative.

------- Comment #35 From SpanKY 2008-01-25 12:52:04 0000 -------
ecompress isnt part of PMS ... it could easily be integrated though as the API
should be clean

however, you're talking about internal stuff, not messages displayed to the
user.  there still should be no reference to suffixes in messages.

------- Comment #36 From Jakub Moc 2008-01-25 13:00:52 0000 -------
*** Bug 207373 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #37 From Jakub Moc 2008-01-27 15:22:29 0000 -------
*** Bug 207688 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

------- Comment #38 From Steev Klimaszewski 2008-02-05 16:37:27 0000 -------
Since these are such simple fixes, why doesn't the QA team just go in and do
the fix when they find it?  I realize the whole stepping on toes thing, but
come on, this is silly.

------- Comment #39 From Mark Loeser 2008-02-05 16:51:27 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #38)
> Since these are such simple fixes, why doesn't the QA team just go in and do
> the fix when they find it?  I realize the whole stepping on toes thing, but
> come on, this is silly.
> 

We will go and fix them (eventually when I get time), but we want to make
maintainers aware of this as well.  I'll be sending something to
g-dev/g-dev-announce, since we want to teach people instead of just going and
changing things without letting people know why the change is needed.

------- Comment #40 From Carsten Lohrke 2008-02-29 13:39:06 0000 -------
Guys, I disagree with you. (In reply to comment #23)
> people arent retarded, they can tab complete

I'm not so sure about that, but this isn't the point. Not listing the exact
file breaks copy and paste for people how like to have a look at the file in
question in some specific file viewer, for example. To me it's more about this
last bit of exactness/quality Gentoo is lacking constantly. Granted this one is
minor issue, but it wouldn't be a big issue to let Portage provide
$ECOMPRESS_EXTENSION. The work needed to modify the ebuilds accordingly
wouldn't be different to what is happening now.

------- Comment #41 From Jeronimo Zucco 2008-08-04 17:26:47 0000 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
> After one of the elog lines states:
> "They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.gz."
> However on my system that file is compressed with .bz2 instead
> So maybe that line should be:
> "They are listed in /usr/share/doc/${PF}/INSTALL.bz2"?
> 
> Reproducible: Always
> 

I would like to suggest other things to put it in DB_CONFIG sample, like:

#
http://www.stanford.edu/services/directory/openldap/configuration/bdb-config.html
set_flags DB_LOG_AUTOREMOVE


# http://www.mail-archive.com/openldap-software@openldap.org/msg06940.html 
# http://coreservices.blog.gustavus.edu/2006/05/03/fedora-core-5-and-openldap/
#set_lk_max_locks 2000
#set_lk_max_lockers 2000
#set_lk_max_objects 2000

First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug