| Summary: | dev-util/git with USE="subversion" should require that dev-util/subversion be built with USE="-dso" | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (RETIRED) <arfrever> |
| Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Fernando J. Pereda (RETIRED) <ferdy> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | dschridde+gentoobugs, gengor, karl, Martin.vGagern, nfortino, radhermit, robbat2, skolima |
| Priority: | High | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | 221931, 223747 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Description
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (RETIRED)
2008-09-24 17:19:11 UTC
Verifying that this workaround works for me. My system is x86 Worked for me, x86 (pentium3 and prescott). Arfrever: I'd actually prefer not to add that check. There are cases when the actual problem (best described in bug 223747) doesn't occur, because the unload order is different, due to interactions from prelink. The upstream bug really does need fixing. (In reply to comment #3) > Arfrever: I'd actually prefer not to add that check. There are cases when the > actual problem (best described in bug 223747) doesn't occur, because the unload > order is different, due to interactions from prelink. > > The upstream bug really does need fixing. Upstream has not fixed the bug since they were made aware of it half a year ago, and has not responded to the lastest mails on the list or the bug report. The fact that it might work in some cases doesn't mean we should accept the fact that a feature that merely enhances performance breaks for for others (with no obvious solution). I'd vote for a built_with_use check in stable (with an ewarn), and a negative USE dep in ~arch. Ok, it prints a warning now. I'm avoiding EAPI=[12] for the moment for git, until we have the 1.6 series in stable. (In reply to comment #5) > Ok, it prints a warning now. I'm avoiding EAPI=[12] for the moment for git, > until we have the 1.6 series in stable. 1.6.0.6 is stable, any chances for this bug now? What's the reason for hesitation concerning an EAPI bump? In CVS for 1.6.2. |
