Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 27200

Summary: epm-0.8.4 broken because of bad entry for Flightgear in /var/db
Product: Portage Development Reporter: Marius Caldas <marsclic>
Component: UnclassifiedAssignee: Aron Griffis (RETIRED) <agriffis>
Status: RESOLVED INVALID    
Severity: normal    
Priority: High    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: x86   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Description Marius Caldas 2003-08-23 17:35:20 UTC
I got the following message from epm: 
epm: Could't parse name/version/suffix/rev from -0.3.3 at /usr/bin/epm line 
78.  
 
Uppon a little debugging I found that the flightgear dependency entries in 
/var/db/flightgear-0.9.2 had erroneous information. The files DEPEND and 
RDEPEND had this line: 
>=dev-gamessimgear/-0.3.3 
when they should read: 
>=dev-games/simgear-0.3.3. 
 
The file flightgear-0.9.2.ebuild has line 22 as:  
DEPEND=">=dev-gamessimgear/-0.3.3" 
when it should be: 
DEPEND=">=dev-games/simgear-0.3.3" 
 
Finally, /var/db/pkg had the following directory: 
dev-gamessimgear/-0.3.3 
The correct placement and naming for this directory would be: 
/var/db/pkg/dev-games/simgear-0.3.3 
 
It clearly seems to be a bug in the database generation. 

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.emerge flightgear 
2.emerge epm 
3.type "epm -qa" 
Actual Results:  
epm returned the following error: 
epm: Could't parse name/version/suffix/rev from -0.3.3 at /usr/bin/epm line 
78. 

Expected Results:  
Assuming this is not a typo in the database, Epm should have done some error 
checking to verify the validity of the database entry, and the database 
generation utility should be corrected to generate the right directory name.
Comment 1 SpanKY gentoo-dev 2003-08-24 14:18:48 UTC
this was a 1 time thing ... i fixed the bug in portage sometime ago ... 
 
i guess epm only needs to be updated to handle invalid DEPEND values ... 
Comment 2 Aron Griffis (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2003-09-06 18:42:29 UTC
I don't see anything to fix here in epm.  The problem was a typo in
the package.  Epm gave an error message because the typo couldn't be
parsed.  Seems like correct behavior to me!  ;-)