Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 620706 - media-plugins/mythplugins-0.27.6_p20160318 depends on dev-qt/qtwebkit:4
Summary: media-plugins/mythplugins-0.27.6_p20160318 depends on dev-qt/qtwebkit:4
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Current packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal
Assignee: No maintainer - Look at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers if you want to take care of it
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: qtwebkit4-removal
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2017-06-04 06:51 UTC by Michael Palimaka (kensington)
Modified: 2017-08-11 15:16 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Michael Palimaka (kensington) gentoo-dev 2017-06-04 06:51:45 UTC
media-plugins/mythplugins-0.27.6_p20160318 depends on dev-qt/qtwebkit:4 which is ancient and will never see any security updates.

I see that there's 0.28 which is ported but has been masked for a long time. Maybe it's time to drop the mask and remove old?
Comment 1 Andreas Sturmlechner gentoo-dev 2017-07-01 18:34:00 UTC
Richard, it has been masked for over a year, was it tested extensively enough? ;)
Comment 2 Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2017-07-01 21:30:36 UTC
I haven't touched it in a year.  I suspect it is fine, but I am no longer maintaining MythTV.  Unfortunately I lost my main Myth frontend and decided to dismantle things.  I don't mind contributing what I know, but I'm not in much of a position to test.

The biggest issue was with the main client, not the plugins.  The client/backend themselves were basically fine but I'm not sure the init.d scripts and systemd units were in an ideal state, with all the changes to the logging/etc.  It is probably safe to unmask to testing and solicit feedback and fixes from users.  Between config options and command line options there are multiple ways to get the logging to work (separate daemon vs built-in), and upstream has changed direction on this more than once.  I'm pretty sure the systemd units were usable but didn't get a chance to test on openrc.  Whether the default suits an individual user is probably a matter of personal taste.
Comment 3 Andreas Sturmlechner gentoo-dev 2017-07-22 00:45:20 UTC
Considering the maintainer-needed state and unresolved other bugs with 0.27, maybe this old version should be dropped without stabilising newer if no other maintainer steps up during the next few weeks.
Comment 4 Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2017-07-22 00:57:54 UTC
(In reply to Andreas Sturmlechner from comment #3)
> Considering the maintainer-needed state and unresolved other bugs with 0.27,
> maybe this old version should be dropped without stabilising newer if no
> other maintainer steps up during the next few weeks.

I think that is a good plan.  0.28 was working fairly well when I last had it running not long after it was introduced.  The QT issues are a good reason to retire the older versions.  The main issues with 0.28 are probably around the init.d scripts and logging/etc (they keep changing how logging works and there are a few ways it can be configured).  I suspect users will step up with patches if they're needed, and if they're not stepping up it probably is working well enough for them.  Of course, sooner or later 0.28 will run into issues...
Comment 5 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2017-07-23 11:27:55 UTC
Rich0: Do you think 0.28 is ready to be finally unmasked?
Comment 6 Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2017-07-23 13:07:45 UTC
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #5)
> Rich0: Do you think 0.28 is ready to be finally unmasked?

0.28 was working fairly well when I last had it running not long after it was introduced.  The QT issues are a good reason to retire the older versions.  The main issues with 0.28 are probably around the init.d scripts and logging/etc (they keep changing how logging works and there are a few ways it can be configured).  I suspect users will step up with patches if they're needed, and if they're not stepping up it probably is working well enough for them. :)
Comment 7 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2017-07-23 13:18:10 UTC
Nice, then, I guess we could unmask it finally as, otherwise, people will get a bit upset if we force them to use a hardmasked version (while forcing them to move to "testing" looks probably more reasonable)
Comment 8 Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2017-07-23 13:37:07 UTC
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #7)
> Nice, then, I guess we could unmask it finally as, otherwise, people will
> get a bit upset if we force them to use a hardmasked version (while forcing
> them to move to "testing" looks probably more reasonable)

Agree.  It is "testing" after all, and I suspect most could figure out how to tweak it and we'll get a bug report with useful feedback.

The practical alternatives aren't going to make people any happier.
Comment 9 Andreas Sturmlechner gentoo-dev 2017-07-23 14:50:50 UTC
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #5)
> Rich0: Do you think 0.28 is ready to be finally unmasked?

That was already done together with a 0.28.1 version bump.
Comment 10 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2017-07-24 08:40:39 UTC
Nice, thanks
Comment 11 Andreas Sturmlechner gentoo-dev 2017-08-11 08:55:44 UTC
It's been almost 3 weeks, can we drop 0.27?
Comment 12 Richard Freeman gentoo-dev 2017-08-11 12:57:59 UTC
(In reply to Andreas Sturmlechner from comment #11)
> It's been almost 3 weeks, can we drop 0.27?

Keep in  mind this package isn't maintained, so nobody really exists to give permission for this.  IMO you can go ahead - we generally don't let unmaintained packages hold up progress and users have an upgrade path.
Comment 13 Andreas Sturmlechner gentoo-dev 2017-08-11 15:16:20 UTC
Thanks, 0.27 removed from tree.