See bug 504116.
and please use echo -e or printf when using the color sequences...
Created attachment 372350 [details] patch for using echo -e and sourcing /lib/gentoo/functions.sh
Created attachment 373024 [details, diff] 0001-Don-t-use-functions.sh-from-etc-init.d-anymore-bug-5.patch Slightly improved patch. Also git formatted...
<QA hat> This is a trivial fix that doesn't come with any real backwards compatibility dangers. In fact, it improves safety of packages through replacing implicit dependency on private API of a medium-sized package by explicit dependency on small, dedicated package. That said, 9 months (1.5yr in case of glibc) to apply the fix is definitely too long. Therefore, I'm setting a deadline on fixing the remaining bugs to 2014-12-27. If the bugs aren't fixed till that point, I will be committing simple 'sed' statements to replace the inherits. </QA hat>
Lars, if you have commit access to proj/gcc-config, please commit. Otherwise, I will ask infra for commit access. QA lead, do you approve?
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #5) > Lars, if you have commit access to proj/gcc-config, please commit. > Otherwise, I will ask infra for commit access. QA lead, do you approve? Let me see if I can get write to gcc-config and binutils-config.
(In reply to Anthony Basile from comment #6) > (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #5) > > Lars, if you have commit access to proj/gcc-config, please commit. > > Otherwise, I will ask infra for commit access. QA lead, do you approve? > > Let me see if I can get write to gcc-config and binutils-config. Sorry binutils-config is done purely in the tree.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #5) >QA lead, do you approve? Yes, do it please
Can you please commit this already?
+*gcc-config-1.8-r1 (24 Apr 2015) + + 24 Apr 2015; Lars Wendler <polynomial-c@gentoo.org> + +gcc-config-1.8-r1.ebuild, + +files/gcc-config-1.8-dont_source_functions_sh_from_etc_initd.patch: + Don't use functions.sh from init.d folder (bug #504118). Raised EAPI to + version 5. + This patch still needs to be merged into the git repository so let's keep this bug upen until that happened.
Thanks for pushing this (and sorry for not getting to it), but please enable FEATURES=test when you're doing development work, especially if you're doing it on behalf of QA. Bug #504116 indicates we need a dep on sys-apps/gentoo-functions. Is this still true? Where did the -e hunk go?
One note on switching to gentoo-functions, unlike openrc which logged eerror and ewarn to stderr, gentoo-functions returns to the baselayout-1 behavior of logging all levels to stdout by default. eerror will log to stderr if EINFO_QUIET=yes. Currently toolchains.eclass assumes the openrc behavior and stdout from gcc-config only contains valid data and proceeds to use it unquoted allowing the '*' prefix to expand to all sorts of nonsense. See https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=547962 I happened to encounter this with gcc-config 1.7.3 and a replacement implementation of /etc/init.d/functions.sh but the issue should be equally applicable to gcc-config 1.8 with /lib/gentoo/functions.sh until toolchains.eclass is fixed.
Could you open a bug against gentoo-functions, please? The stdout behavior is really stupid.
I masked gcc-config-1.8-r1 in the meantime.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #13) > Could you open a bug against gentoo-functions, please? The stdout behavior > is really stupid. Filed bug 548158 for gentoo-functions
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/commit/?id=fbf72a0a0c3c5708e68fa493b2014605b828f2e6 Mike it looks like there hasn't been a gcc-config release since 2012 and there's a bunch of changes stacked up. Can you make a 1.9 with a >=gentoo-functions-0.10 dep?
yes/maybe/no/why not?
Has this been stalled?
(In reply to Ryan Hill from comment #16) > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/commit/ > ?id=fbf72a0a0c3c5708e68fa493b2014605b828f2e6 > > Mike it looks like there hasn't been a gcc-config release since 2012 and > there's a bunch of changes stacked up. Can you make a 1.9 with a > >=gentoo-functions-0.10 dep? or unmasque gcc-config-1.8-r1 and add >=g... may be best creat a 1.9... please... it is simple... we are waiting for 1,5 years...
How can I raise priority? I was upgrading system. Now my system is half broke, I am lucky I can still use X. Now I can not upgrade any more. So system is in half usable state. With this catastrophe with multilibs, then problems with systemd, now this. OK, second is not related to Gentoo in any way, but first and third, are really putting me off, to a stage where i want to abandon gentoo all together. I was using it for over 5 years minimum, probably around 8 years or so. Feels like it's getting worse every year. 80% of my most used programs don't work, because I had to remove them or their libraries, so I can do clean installation(with no /etc/portage/package.keywords trickery). I moved to systemd today, and I can confirm this is bad bug. I have done a lot of googling. I can see that a lot of other people have exact same problems in forums since 2012 If you can't give solution, please give workaround, pretty please. My time is running out, i don't want to use other distro, but I really am forced to.
(In reply to Dmitri Seletski from comment #20) > If you can't give solution, please give workaround, pretty please. ln -s /lib/rc/sh/functions.sh /etc/init.d/functions.sh
(In reply to Zac Medico from comment #21) > (In reply to Dmitri Seletski from comment #20) > > If you can't give solution, please give workaround, pretty please. > > ln -s /lib/rc/sh/functions.sh /etc/init.d/functions.sh Thanks, as per suggestion, I found functions.sh and did ln -s /lib64/gentoo/functions.sh /etc/init.d/functions.sh then, gcc-config -c then, gcc-config 4 and I am able to compile again, thanks a lot!
You mean thas you remove openrc... and it works? if so please update gcc-config!!!
I did, work around helped me, but I hit another issue. I will report it in different place.
(In reply to Ryan Hill from comment #16) > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/commit/ > ?id=fbf72a0a0c3c5708e68fa493b2014605b828f2e6 > > Mike it looks like there hasn't been a gcc-config release since 2012 and > there's a bunch of changes stacked up. Can you make a 1.9 with a > >=gentoo-functions-0.10 dep? Ryan, any chance to get some real action here? Mike is clearly busy with other stuff, so either someone else needs to do a new release, or we *need* to unmask -r1 as an intermediate fix.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #25) > (In reply to Ryan Hill from comment #16) > > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gcc-config.git/commit/ > > ?id=fbf72a0a0c3c5708e68fa493b2014605b828f2e6 > > > > Mike it looks like there hasn't been a gcc-config release since 2012 and > > there's a bunch of changes stacked up. Can you make a 1.9 with a > > >=gentoo-functions-0.10 dep? > > Ryan, any chance to get some real action here? Mike is clearly busy with > other stuff, so either someone else needs to do a new release, or we *need* > to unmask -r1 as an intermediate fix. Why gcc-config needs a gentoo-functions-0.10 dep if the plan is to add this package to @system?
I never heard of this plan. And even if it is, people are expected to explicitly depend on it, i.e. to remove the need of having it in @system forever.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #27) > I never heard of this plan. And even if it is, people are expected to > explicitly depend on it, i.e. to remove the need of having it in @system > forever. See the comment 0 at 504116. William Hubbs say: > When yu make the fix, please do not add a hard dependency to > sys-apps/gentoo-functions. The plan is to add this package to @system as > soon as it goes stable.
(In reply to Lara Maia from comment #28) > (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #27) > > I never heard of this plan. And even if it is, people are expected to > > explicitly depend on it, i.e. to remove the need of having it in @system > > forever. > > See the comment 0 at 504116. William Hubbs say: > > > When yu make the fix, please do not add a hard dependency to > > sys-apps/gentoo-functions. The plan is to add this package to @system as > > soon as it goes stable. See comment 1 at the same bug ;-P. He corrected himself.
I've added gentoo-functions dep to 1.8-r1. Can we unmask it now, please?
commit b6744e549e4104b39c47e0cb0655a56ed0629add Author: Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> Date: Sat Jan 30 15:24:39 2016 package.mask: Unmask gcc-config-1.8-r1, #504118
Do we need to track this through to stabilization? I just noticed that gcc-config broke on a stable system I was testing unmerging openrc on.
(In reply to Richard Freeman from comment #32) > Do we need to track this through to stabilization? I just noticed that > gcc-config broke on a stable system I was testing unmerging openrc on. Yes, before the package is in stable it should remain open with InVCS keyword
Time to stabilize gcc-config-1.8-r1?
Arches please stabilize sys-devel/gcc-config-1.8-r1 Keywords for sys-devel/gcc-config: | | u | | a a p s a n r | n | | l m h i p p r m m i i s | e u s | r | p d a p a p c a x m i 6 o s 3 | a s l | e | h 6 r p 6 p 6 r 8 6 p 8 s c 9 s | p e o | p | a 4 m a 4 c 4 c 6 4 s k 2 v 0 h | i d t | o ----------+---------------------------------+-------+------- 1.7.3 | + + + + + + + + + + ~ + o o + + | 0 o 0 | gentoo 1.8 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ | 0 # | gentoo [I]1.8-r1 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ | 5 o | gentoo
We have to wait for bug #599792
here is standalone stabilization request: https://bugs.gentoo.org/626646
(In reply to David Heidelberg (okias) from comment #37) > here is standalone stabilization request: https://bugs.gentoo.org/626646 Let's do it there.