First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug
Bug#: 226071
Alias:
Product:
Component:
Status: RESOLVED
Resolution: FIXED
Assigned To: Jeremy Olexa <darkside@gentoo.org>
Hardware:
OS:
Version:
Priority:
Severity:
Reporter: David Watzke <david@watzke.cz>
Add CC:
CC:
URL:
Summary:
Status Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Filename Description Type Creator Created Size Actions
man-pages-cs-0.17-dont-wipe-old.patch ebuild patch to fix this bug patch David Watzke 2008-06-12 14:55 0000 573 bytes Details | Diff
Create a New Attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.) View All

Bug 226071 depends on: Show dependency tree
Show dependency graph
Bug 226071 blocks:
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: 2008-06-12 13:58 0000 
app-i18n/man-pages-cs-0.17-r1 is trying to remove the installed manpages from
the system..

# wipe the old pages
for i in latest/man?; do for j in $i/*; do k=`basename $i`; l=`basename $j`; rm
-f /usr/share/man/cs/$k/$l; done; done
rm: cannot remove `/usr/share/man/cs/man1/ar.1': Permission denied
rm: cannot remove `/usr/share/man/cs/man1/at.1': Permission denied
rm: cannot remove `/usr/share/man/cs/man1/basename.1': Permission denied
rm: cannot remove `/usr/share/man/cs/man1/bzdiff.1': Permission denied
... and so on ...
make: *** [remove] Error 1

that's not very clever, I guess... I'm using paludis and the "userpriv" feature
or how is it called

------- Comment #1 From Jeremy Olexa 2008-06-12 14:30:40 0000 ------- 
Hmm, you are right. Its in upstream's makefile. I will look at removing that
bit because we should be letting $PM remove them..

Admittetly, I kinda got caught in this 'trivial' version bump as there have
been quite a few bugs with it that is associated with me not have these man
pages on my system (naturally, I'm not Czech ;) ) So, do you see anything else
not correct with the ebuild so hopefully I don't have to fix anythign else?

------- Comment #2 From David Watzke 2008-06-12 14:37:11 0000 ------- 
Yeah, I noticed... it's indeed because of these messy "build" scripts. Maybe it
would be better to write our own ones instead of using these. But fixing (or
removing) this bit should be enough to get it finally working, I guess. Once
it's installed, it should be fine...

------- Comment #3 From Jeremy Olexa 2008-06-12 14:41:16 0000 ------- 
(In reply to comment #2)
> Yeah, I noticed... it's indeed because of these messy "build" scripts. Maybe it
> would be better to write our own ones instead of using these. But fixing (or
> removing) this bit should be enough to get it finally working, I guess. Once
> it's installed, it should be fine...
> 

Ok, I won't get to it until tonight because I am at work so feel free to hack
away if you want. ;)

------- Comment #4 From David Watzke 2008-06-12 14:55:32 0000 ------- 
Created an attachment (id=156505) [edit]
ebuild patch to fix this bug

Ok, here comes the fix... we only need to run make latest, possible compression
(make gz) is done by the PM.

------- Comment #5 From Jeremy Olexa 2008-06-12 22:17:24 0000 ------- 
(In reply to comment #4)
> Created an attachment (id=156505) [edit]
> ebuild patch to fix this bug
> 
> Ok, here comes the fix... we only need to run make latest, possible compression
> (make gz) is done by the PM.
> 

Great. Thanks. Fixed in CVS.
First Last Prev Next    No search results available      Search page      Enter new bug