Bug 944463 – dev-tex/minted, dev-python/latexrestricted, dev-tex/latex2pydata: keywording for new packages of Tex Live 2024

• Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 946199
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Florian Schmaus 2024-11-22 12:18:47 UTC]

Please keyword

[addCollapseLink(1, 1, 'Toggle comment display'); [+] Comment 1 NATTkA bot 2024-11-29 09:20:12 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)]

Unable to check for sanity:

> package masked: dev-python/latexrestricted-0.6.0

[Comment 2 Florian Schmaus 2024-11-30 08:49:29 UTC]

@arch testers: there is a catch 22 here, since there is a circular dep texlive-latexextra → minted → latex2pydata → texlive-latexextra. I believe this circular dep and that texlive 2024 is currently masked is what makes NATTkA unable to come up with a positive sanity check.

Please continue with the keywording nevertheless, since it is required to unmask texlive 2024.

[addCollapseLink(3, 1, 'Toggle comment display'); [+] Comment 3 NATTkA bot 2024-11-30 08:52:15 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)]

Unable to check for sanity:

> package masked: dev-python/latexrestricted-0.6.2

[Comment 4 Sam James 2024-12-06 14:52:27 UTC]

(In reply to Florian Schmaus from comment #2)
> @arch testers: there is a catch 22 here, since there is a circular dep
> texlive-latexextra → minted → latex2pydata → texlive-latexextra. I believe
> this circular dep and that texlive 2024 is currently masked is what makes
> NATTkA unable to come up with a positive sanity check.
> 
> Please continue with the keywording nevertheless, since it is required to
> unmask texlive 2024.

This means no automation can proceed. We need to find a way around it, sorry. It's also going to be a big pain for users when unmasked, no?

[Comment 5 Sam James 2024-12-06 14:53:14 UTC]

The bad sanity check - because of the mask - means nothing is going to end up testing it too.

You should request rekeywording once the mask is gone.

[Comment 6 Florian Schmaus 2024-12-06 15:01:34 UTC]

(In reply to Sam James from comment #4)
> This means no automation can proceed. We need to find a way around it,
> sorry. It's also going to be a big pain for users when unmasked, no?

(In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> You should request rekeywording once the mask is gone.

I am not sure if I can follow. This bug is about keywording as necessary prerequisite for removing the mask. One this bug is fixed the mask can be removed and users will find a consistent keywords.

Right now it's a catch 22:
package is masked because of inconsistent keywords → keywording request to make keywords consistent again (this bug) → sanity check fails, because packages are masked (I believe)

[Comment 7 Sam James 2024-12-06 15:02:09 UTC]

(In reply to Florian Schmaus from comment #6)
> (In reply to Sam James from comment #4)
> > This means no automation can proceed. We need to find a way around it,
> > sorry. It's also going to be a big pain for users when unmasked, no?
> 
> (In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> > You should request rekeywording once the mask is gone.
> 
> I am not sure if I can follow. This bug is about keywording as necessary
> prerequisite for removing the mask. One this bug is fixed the mask can be
> removed and users will find a consistent keywords.
> 

You should drop all the keywords for non-amd64 then let the bug handle rekeywording.

> Right now it's a catch 22:
> package is masked because of inconsistent keywords → keywording request to
> make keywords consistent again (this bug) → sanity check fails, because
> packages are masked (I believe)

Yes, and that means automation won't go anywhere.

[Comment 8 Florian Schmaus 2024-12-06 15:25:39 UTC]

(In reply to Sam James from comment #7)
> (In reply to Florian Schmaus from comment #6)
> > (In reply to Sam James from comment #4)
> > > This means no automation can proceed. We need to find a way around it,
> > > sorry. It's also going to be a big pain for users when unmasked, no?
> > 
> > (In reply to Sam James from comment #5)
> > > You should request rekeywording once the mask is gone.
> > 
> > I am not sure if I can follow. This bug is about keywording as necessary
> > prerequisite for removing the mask. One this bug is fixed the mask can be
> > removed and users will find a consistent keywords.
> > 
> 
> You should drop all the keywords for non-amd64 then let the bug handle
> rekeywording.

Note that this would mean that most of TeX Live, especially the 40 dev-texlive/* packages would have their keywords reduced to amd64 for TeX Live 2024. That is fine by me, but this means that a lot of packages would require re-keywording that would otherwise not.



> > Right now it's a catch 22:
> > package is masked because of inconsistent keywords → keywording request to
> > make keywords consistent again (this bug) → sanity check fails, because
> > packages are masked (I believe)
> 
> Yes, and that means automation won't go anywhere.

Maybe. I was hoping, in order to avoid the above mass re-keywording of texlive packages, arch testers could simply unmask texlive 2024, emerge the two packages of this bug (dev-python/latexrestricted and dev-tex/latex2pydata), do their testing and eventually keyword the two packages. But I admit that I have no insight if that is feasible.

Anyhow, as discussed in #-tex, I'll look into a USE=minted based approach.

[Comment 9 Larry the Git Cow 2024-12-07 09:35:07 UTC]

The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s):

https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=425780295c4dddad0b726437d9fcb885bc26defa

commit 425780295c4dddad0b726437d9fcb885bc26defa
Author:     Florian Schmaus <[e-mail]>
AuthorDate: 2024-12-07 09:31:28 +0000
Commit:     Florian Schmaus <[e-mail]>
CommitDate: 2024-12-07 09:34:33 +0000

    dev-texlive/texlive-latexextra: temporarily drop minted PDEPEND
    
    To help with keywording of the added dependencies of the new minted
    version, we temporarily drop the minted PDEPEND on texlive-latexextra to
    break the cycle dependency.
    
    This hopefully allows for a positive sanity-check of bug #944463.
    
    Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/944463
    Signed-off-by: Florian Schmaus <[e-mail]>

 dev-texlive/texlive-latexextra/texlive-latexextra-2024_p72895.ebuild | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

[addCollapseLink(10, 1, 'Toggle comment display'); [+] Comment 10 NATTkA bot 2024-12-07 09:40:15 UTC Comment hidden (obsolete)]

Unable to check for sanity:

> package masked: dev-tex/minted-3.4.0

[Comment 11 NATTkA bot 2024-12-10 11:04:21 UTC]

Sanity check failed:

> dev-tex/latex2pydata-0.4.1
>   bdepend ~alpha stable profile default/linux/alpha/23.0 (110 total)
>     >=dev-texlive/texlive-fontsextra-2024
>     >=dev-texlive/texlive-latexextra-2024
>   bdepend ~arm dev profile default/linux/arm/23.0/armv4 (110 total)
>     >=dev-texlive/texlive-fontsextra-2024
>     >=dev-texlive/texlive-latexextra-2024

[Comment 12 Florian Schmaus 2024-12-10 11:10:11 UTC]

We will now handle this in bug #946199

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 946199 ***