Bug 25129

Summary:	Portage shouldn't make a package of an ebuild that is not package safe
Product:	Portage Development	Reporter:	Joby Walker <zorloc>
Component:	Unclassified	Assignee:	Portage team <dev-portage>
Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE
Severity:	normal
Priority:	High
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Package list:		Runtime testing required:	---

Description Joby Walker 2003-07-23 11:55:40 UTC

The prime example is the current baselayout ebuild.  This ebuild is known to be
not package safe, it will not be made package safe, but it is still possible to
make a package (emerge -b) even though it will toss several errors if another
computer tries to use that package (emerge -k).  I would like it if an ebuild
cannot be made package safe an "emerge -b" should not be able to make a .tbz2
package to help prevent errors.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. emerge -b baselayout on portage master
2. emerge -k baselayout on portage slave

Actual Results:  
Since there is a baselayout*.tbz2 created by the emerge -b on an emerge -k, the
slave will try to install the binary package which will lead to several errors.

Expected Results:  
On an emerge -b a warning should be tossed that the ebuild is not package safe
and no package (.tbz2) should be created.  Thus on the slave computers and
emerge -k will force an ebuild rather than binary install.

Comment 1 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2003-07-23 19:33:53 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25152 ***

Comment 2 Ryan Finnie 2003-07-27 20:37:59 UTC

How is this considered a duplicate?  Both seem to be valid, yet distinct bugs.  This one suggests that there should be an option to mark a package as binary unsafe (which is useful; up unil now I didn't know that packages like baselayout were binary unsafe), while bug 25152 states that certain functions are not called when merging a binary package.

Please re-open.

Comment 3 Ryan Finnie 2003-09-05 12:00:36 UTC

Please re-open.  Bug was marked duplicate of an unrelated bug.

Comment 4 Martin Holzer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev

2003-09-05 12:22:31 UTC

wrangler

Comment 5 SpanKY gentoo-dev

2003-09-05 14:26:59 UTC

the packages are not 'binary pkg safe' because those functions arent run

in other words, there should be no such thing as a 'binary unsafe package'

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 25152 ***