Bug 565826 – media-gfx/exiv2-0.25-r2 stabilisation request

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description DrSlony 2015-11-15 09:50:03 UTC]

The version of exiv2 not keyworded ~amd64 in portage is 3 years old, please unkeyword 0.25.

Reproducible: Always

[Comment 1 Jeff 2015-12-18 15:19:45 UTC]

Request to remove "introspection" flag? Is it necessary?

[Comment 2 Michael Palimaka (kensington) 2015-12-18 15:45:19 UTC]

(In reply to Jeff from comment #1)
> Request to remove "introspection" flag? Is it necessary?

Is it causing problems?

[Comment 3 DrSlony 2016-01-08 10:05:02 UTC]

It just keeps getting older.

[Comment 4 Michael Palimaka (kensington) 2016-01-13 14:48:37 UTC]

-r2 was just added with some backported fixes, let's target that instead.

[Comment 5 Stuart Longland 2016-02-06 09:54:35 UTC]

Another reason for stabalisation, I found that exiv2-0.24-r1 kept failing with the same message:

iptceasy.cpp:5:27: fatal error: exiv2/exiv2.hpp: No such file or directory

whilst building the samples (even though USE had -examples).  I don't have the full log handy, but could unmerge exiv2 and try again if that was wanted.

Adding an entry to accept the ~amd64 keyword for media-gfx/exiv2-0.25-r2 worked however, that I could build (and without the parallel build issue that Hanno experienced in bug #572394).  So rather than filing a bug for the earlier version, I just vote that this package get stabalised.

[Comment 6 DrSlony 2016-02-06 11:53:27 UTC]

What can I do to speed this up?

[Comment 7 Tobias Klausmann (RETIRED) 2016-02-09 16:03:10 UTC]

Stable on alpha.

[Comment 8 Agostino Sarubbo 2016-02-13 15:37:24 UTC]

amd64 stable

[Comment 9 Agostino Sarubbo 2016-02-14 10:17:55 UTC]

x86 stable

[Comment 10 Markus Meier 2016-02-14 17:25:19 UTC]

arm stable

[Comment 11 Erik Quaeghebeur 2016-02-17 09:30:11 UTC]

The stabilization of exiv2-25-r2 has caused some dependency issues, seemingly because not all packages that depend on it were properly adapted first (to the new subslot?).

See forum post https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=7881406 and bug #574904 for example.

I guess the stabilization cannot be reversed now, even if it feels premature from the perspective of users having to deal with the breakage it causes. I suppose that checking all packages that depend on exiv2 should have been done before stabilization, so that activity's coordination (adding blockers here) is still within the purview of this bug.

[Comment 12 Michael Palimaka (kensington) 2016-02-17 11:29:50 UTC]

(In reply to Erik Quaeghebeur from comment #11)
> The stabilization of exiv2-25-r2 has caused some dependency issues,
> seemingly because not all packages that depend on it were properly adapted
> first (to the new subslot?).
> 
> See forum post https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=7881406 and bug
> #574904 for example.
> 
> I guess the stabilization cannot be reversed now, even if it feels premature
> from the perspective of users having to deal with the breakage it causes. I
> suppose that checking all packages that depend on exiv2 should have been
> done before stabilization, so that activity's coordination (adding blockers
> here) is still within the purview of this bug.

The subslot conflicts in that forum post appear to be some issue with portage and not specific to exiv2.

[Comment 13 Agostino Sarubbo 2016-03-16 11:52:26 UTC]

ppc stable

[Comment 14 Agostino Sarubbo 2016-03-17 10:54:12 UTC]

ppc64 stable

[Comment 15 Agostino Sarubbo 2016-03-19 12:16:50 UTC]

sparc stable

[Comment 16 Agostino Sarubbo 2016-03-20 11:56:27 UTC]

ia64 stable

[Comment 17 Michael Palimaka (kensington) 2016-06-02 15:12:34 UTC]

@hppa, it looks like the only stable revdep is media-gfx/ufraw so I wonder if there's still interest in having this package stable on your arch?

[Comment 18 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) 2016-07-03 10:45:51 UTC]

Stable for HPPA. Closing.