Summary: | Remove old-style virtual/portage | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Ulrich Müller <ulm> |
Component: | Eclasses | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | catalyst, ciaran.mccreesh, dagger, ferringb, peper, releng, tanderson |
Priority: | Normal | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 350792 | ||
Attachments: |
Proposed package-manager-0.ebuild
quick fix for catalyst |
Description
Ulrich Müller
![]() Perhaps we should use virtual/package-manager instead. AFAIK the only use for this virtual is for the system set. <ulm> zmedico: do you have an opinion on bug 358847 comment #1? <willikins> https://bugs.gentoo.org/358847 "Remove old-style virtual/portage"; Gentoo Linux, Eclasses and Profiles; NEW; ulm:dev-portage <zmedico> ulm: as long as there are no reverse dependencies then there's no cost in renaming it to virtual/package-manager. I don't have any preference about what we call it. <ulm> zmedico: indeed it has no reverse dependencies <ulm> it appears only in profiles/base/packages and in packages.build of some subprofiles @ferringb: Shouldn't pkgcore be another possible dependency of the virtual? Created attachment 269061 [details] Proposed package-manager-0.ebuild Proposed ebuild is attached, please review. Would dev-portage@g.o be o.k. as maintainer in metadata? (I think there won't be much to maintain anyway.) (In reply to comment #3) > Would dev-portage@g.o be o.k. as maintainer in metadata? (I think there won't > be much to maintain anyway.) That's fine, though base-system might be more appropriate since the virtual exists mainly for the purpose of defining the system set. virtual/package-manager committed to tree and profiles updated. Please remove the PROVIDE="virtual/portage" line from your ebuilds. Okay, PROVIDE is no longer in sys-apps/portage ebuilds. It just realized that this change might break out auto stage builds since catalyst seems to have a hardcoded reference to virtual/portage. Created attachment 269249 [details, diff]
quick fix for catalyst
Currently, emerge doesn't have an a way to force the dependencies of the new-style virtual/package-manager ebuild to be re-merged. So, the closest and simplest fix is to hardcode sys-apps/portage into catalyst.
(In reply to comment #8) > Created attachment 269249 [details, diff] > quick fix for catalyst > > Currently, emerge doesn't have an a way to force the dependencies of the > new-style virtual/package-manager ebuild to be re-merged. So, the closest and > simplest fix is to hardcode sys-apps/portage into catalyst. Applied, on catalyst-2.0.6.915 (In reply to comment #5) > Please remove the PROVIDE="virtual/portage" line from your ebuilds. @paludis team: Great that you not only don't remove the PROVIDE from existing ebuilds, but even add new ones (0.60.4) with it. :( Don't think the Paludis team is Cc:ed... (In reply to comment #11) > Don't think the Paludis team is Cc:ed... Maintainer from metadata was, maybe that should be fixed then? It should be all fixed now in paludis ebuilds. I also added myself to metadata. Thanks everybody. Closing. |