|Summary:||sys-apps/portage: glsa-check --list new behavior is deprecated|
|Product:||Portage Development||Reporter:||Paul Varner (RETIRED) <fuzzyray>|
|Component:||Tools||Assignee:||Portage team <dev-portage>|
|Severity:||normal||CC:||esigra, jakub.januszkiewicz, pauldv|
|Package list:||Runtime testing required:||---|
Description Paul Varner (RETIRED) 2009-08-18 19:41:24 UTC
Comment 1 Jakub Januszkiewicz 2009-08-18 21:03:04 UTC
As Robert Buchholz explained in bug #275105, comment #7, automatically injecting GLSAs when the --fix option is used is not a good idea. After giving it a thought, I have to agree. However, such a change should be communicated in some way, so that admins have an opportunity to update their scripts/workflows. Possible problem that this change introduces is someone writing a script which 1. uses --fix to automatically resolve GLSAs that don't affect their system, 2. notifies about all remaining GLSAs (the list generated with --list [without parameter]). Before gentoolkit 0.3 the notification would include only unapplied GLSAs that affect the system. Since 0.3 it would contain all GLSAs. Obviously, a proper solution would be to reduce the script to just notify about `glsa-check --list affected`, but the point is that 0.3 breaks something that used to work (even if it was not an optimal solution, as I know now). Not to make this any longer, I basically want to say that I understand and agree with the change in glsa-check, but information about the change should be provided in a way that would be impossible for admins to miss (ELOG would be a sufficient minimum, IMO).
Comment 2 Robert Buchholz (RETIRED) 2009-08-18 22:24:06 UTC
Thanks for your feedback, it's very much appreciated. An elog has been added to rc7, and I think we need to extend this in some way. I feel like the gentoolkit guidexml doc could be a good point to document glsa-check in general, and fuzzyray mentioned the possibility of a glep42 news item. Either way, this needs to be addressed before getting it stable, but at this point it's too much in a flux for me to start writing docs (plus, i'm rather busy until mid september).
Comment 3 Jakub Januszkiewicz 2009-08-30 14:34:17 UTC
Thanks for adding the elog, it should be enough to warn people of potential problems. (In reply to comment #2) > Either way, this needs to be addressed before getting it stable, but at this > point it's too much in a flux for me to start writing docs (plus, i'm rather > busy until mid september). Out of curiosity, are any further changes planned in glsa-check behaviour? When, more or less, is it expected to hit stable?
Comment 4 Zac Medico 2019-08-19 05:25:45 UTC
glsa-check is included with >=sys-apps/portage-2.3.72 (bug 463952).