Bug 568784 – net-firewall/iptables-1.6.0: version bump

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description nvinson234 2015-12-19 14:55:58 UTC]

iptables-1.6.0 was recently released.  This is a request to update to that version.

Reproducible: Always

[Comment 1 nvinson234 2015-12-19 15:03:22 UTC]

Created attachment 419820 [details]
Proposed iptables-1.6.0 ebuild

This ebuild also adds the nftables USE flag to enable the nftables compatibility tools.
    
Note: the nftables USE flag will need to be masked for the following architectures as net-libs/libnftnl does not support them:
    - alpha
    - hppa
    - ia64
    - powerpc
    - sparc

[Comment 2 SpanKY 2015-12-23 00:15:33 UTC]

http://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=70942e923097a6370e6bf7f9d88f2b7325b26762

[Comment 3 Joakim Tjernlund 2015-12-23 13:35:39 UTC]

(In reply to nvinson234 from comment #1)
> Created attachment 419820 [details]
> Proposed iptables-1.6.0 ebuild
> 
> This ebuild also adds the nftables USE flag to enable the nftables
> compatibility tools.
>     
> Note: the nftables USE flag will need to be masked for the following
> architectures as net-libs/libnftnl does not support them:
>     - alpha
>     - hppa
>     - ia64
>     - powerpc
>     - sparc

Where do you see that these arch's are unsupported in libnftnl?
I am especially interested in ppc.

[Comment 4 SpanKY 2015-12-23 15:55:57 UTC]

(In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #3)

please see the referenced bug -- 569254

[Comment 5 Joakim Tjernlund 2015-12-23 19:34:31 UTC]

(In reply to SpanKY from comment #4)
> (In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #3)
> 
> please see the referenced bug -- 569254

hmm, I cannot see what the problem is for ppc in 569254, the reason for
masking ppc is not clear.
Google does does not tell me anything either nor does the sources
for net-libs/libnftnl

[Comment 6 SpanKY 2015-12-23 19:47:44 UTC]

(In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #5)

seems pretty obvious to me: the bug is requesting keyword testing, therefore the logical conclusion is that the package isn't yet keyworded or tested, so it is masked until someone does.  this is Gentoo SOP.

[Comment 7 Anthony Basile 2015-12-23 20:26:13 UTC]

(In reply to SpanKY from comment #6)
> (In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #5)
> 
> seems pretty obvious to me: the bug is requesting keyword testing, therefore
> the logical conclusion is that the package isn't yet keyworded or tested, so
> it is masked until someone does.  this is Gentoo SOP.

i'll take care of it for ppc.  let's move discussion over to bug #569254 if any more is needed.  this bug requested a bump for iptables and that's done.

[Comment 8 Joakim Tjernlund 2015-12-23 20:38:32 UTC]

(In reply to SpanKY from comment #6)
> (In reply to Joakim Tjernlund from comment #5)
> 
> seems pretty obvious to me: the bug is requesting keyword testing, therefore
> the logical conclusion is that the package isn't yet keyworded or tested, so
> it is masked until someone does.  this is Gentoo SOP.

I guess I don't fully grasp Masking then. I figured masking was for known
problems with the pkg, not that it had to be tested by someone before
keywording was allowed. I clearly have some learning to do here.