Bug 115274

Summary:	sys-fs/avfs-0.9999 Portage Inclusion Request
Product:	Gentoo Linux	Reporter:	Peter Hyman <pete4abw>
Component:	New packages	Assignee:	Gentoo Linux bug wranglers <bug-wranglers>
Status:	VERIFIED DUPLICATE
Severity:	enhancement
Priority:	High
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
URL:	http://sourceforge.net/projects/avf
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---

Description Peter Hyman 2005-12-12 01:35:22 UTC

Bug #23112 has been around for a while, but recently has been updated with a
working ebuild that provides functionality. Even though the version is from cvs,
hence the version #, it is the only one which works with kernel 2.6.x and the
only version that provides support for FUSE (sys-fs/fuse). The project is low
volume in terms of changes -- indeed the only changes since July have been
documentation. (note to Jakub or bug-wrangler, dragonheart@gentoo.org suggested
this is the proper method for requesting portage updates for existing bugs).

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:




I notice bug #23112 was assigned to the kernel@gentoo.org. Actually, this module
is standalone and does not depend on anything other than fuse which is a
separate project, genstef@gentoo.org. Another name from the original bug was
plasmaroo@gentoo.org. Anyway, I hope this will get included. Anyone who works
with ROX or a non-kde, non-gnome window manager will benefit from being able to
view compressed files.

Comment 1 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2005-12-12 01:41:40 UTC

*** Bug 115275 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2005-12-12 01:44:32 UTC

Why are you filing a duplicate bug about exactly the same thing, especially if
the original bug is still open?

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23112 ***

Comment 3 Peter Hyman 2005-12-12 01:48:38 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)
> Why are you filing a duplicate bug about exactly the same thing, especially if
> the original bug is still open?
> 
> *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 23112 ***

because when I hit commit, nothing happened for 5 minutes. So I stopped the
browser page and clicked commit again. I never received a bug submitted message
the first time. I was afraid something like this would happen :(

Comment 4 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2005-12-12 01:51:56 UTC

I don't know if you actually noticed, but this bug is marked as duplicate of Bug
23112, as I fail to see why do we need two bugs on the same ebuild. (I'm not
talking about Bug 115275 at all.)

Comment 5 Peter Hyman 2005-12-12 01:54:43 UTC

(In reply to comment #4)
> I don't know if you actually noticed, but this bug is marked as duplicate of Bug
> 23112, as I fail to see why do we need two bugs on the same ebuild. (I'm not
> talking about Bug 115275 at all.)

Please see bug #113289 before you close this bug and see how it is a duplicate
of an original report. It's not really a duplicate at all. Bug #23112 supplied
the ebuild. This bug is a request to include it. See 113289 for an example of
how this was processed with gnupg.

Comment 6 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2005-12-12 01:58:41 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> Bug #23112 supplied the ebuild. This bug is a request to include it. See
113289 > for an example of how this was processed with gnupg.

I still hope you are just joking... Why on earth should we have TWO bugs - one
with the ebuild and another requesting to include ebuild in the first one?

How's Bug 113289 related? It's a keywording bug for an ebuild that *is* actually
in portage.

CLOSED.