Summary: | media-gfx/sam2p-0.49.3 stabilization | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Kent Fredric (IRC: kent\n) (RETIRED) <kentnl> | ||||
Component: | Stabilization | Assignee: | TeX project <tex> | ||||
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||||||
Severity: | normal | CC: | perl | ||||
Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | STABLEREQ | ||||
Version: | unspecified | Flags: | stable-bot:
sanity-check+
|
||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||
URL: | https://github.com/pts/sam2p/issues/2 | ||||||
Whiteboard: | was: <media-gfx/sam2p-0.49.3 fails compile without '.' in @INC (do "hq.pl" failed, '.' is no longer in @INC) | ||||||
Package list: |
=media-gfx/sam2p-0.49.3 alpha amd64 arm hppa ia64 ppc ppc64 sparc x86
|
Runtime testing required: | No | ||||
Bug Depends on: | |||||||
Bug Blocks: | 612408, 630844 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Thanks, I was going to ask what all this means for mere mortals like me, but I noticed you reported this upstream and it got fixed meanwhile. Fix imported, thanks! commit ffb4b769ec24ec1e0801375dadacffd557b6ce75 (HEAD -> master, origin/master, origin/HEAD) Author: Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> Date: Mon May 15 17:23:05 2017 +0200 media-gfx/sam2p: Import upstream fix to build with perl 5.26, bug #617014 If you can keep this open until affected versions are removed from tree, that'd be nice. Because end users being able to install a stable sam2p that is affected on a stable 5.26 would be a fatal combination. Hence, 5.26's eventual stabilization should be blocked on the affected versions being removed ( or at very least, a stable version being available without affect ) Unless of course, you are entirely ok with sam2p stable being broken come 5.26 stabilization. (I've left the bug resolved though, you're the maintainer, its up to you :)) (In reply to Kent Fredric (IRC: kent\n) from comment #2) > If you can keep this open until affected versions are removed from tree, > that'd be nice. Because end users being able to install a stable sam2p that > is affected on a stable 5.26 would be a fatal combination. > > Hence, 5.26's eventual stabilization should be blocked on the affected > versions being removed ( or at very least, a stable version being available > without affect ) > > Unless of course, you are entirely ok with sam2p stable being broken come > 5.26 stabilization. > > (I've left the bug resolved though, you're the maintainer, its up to you :)) Well, I usually don't track bugs like that; if you want to convert this bug to a stablereq, feel free, but it sounds more like a candidate for a new bug blocking a perl 5.26 stable bug; I don't see any usefulness in a bug with nothing actionable. (In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #3) > Well, I usually don't track bugs like that; if you want to convert this bug > to a stablereq, feel free, but it sounds more like a candidate for a new bug > blocking a perl 5.26 stable bug; I don't see any usefulness in a bug with > nothing actionable. Just you typically have to wait a month before stable reqs :) And besides, how would you respond if you had 2 stable versions in tree, and somebody reported a bug that the older was now broken to the point of not being usable. That's actionable right? That'd be a "ok, we'll clean this up so its not a problem any more". Just its too soon to do that right now :) (In reply to Kent Fredric (IRC: kent\n) from comment #4) > (In reply to Alexis Ballier from comment #3) > > Well, I usually don't track bugs like that; if you want to convert this bug > > to a stablereq, feel free, but it sounds more like a candidate for a new bug > > blocking a perl 5.26 stable bug; I don't see any usefulness in a bug with > > nothing actionable. > > Just you typically have to wait a month before stable reqs :) Yes. I don't mind having a stablereq sitting for time to pass. I do mind having a build failure bug open that is fixed and just waiting for its corresponding stablereq. That's why I told you that if you want this open, convert this to stablereq and we'll all be happy. > And besides, how would you respond if you had 2 stable versions in tree, and > somebody reported a bug that the older was now broken to the point of not > being usable. > > That's actionable right? > > That'd be a "ok, we'll clean this up so its not a problem any more". Just > its too soon to do that right now :) If it's broken, it's not too soon: When something is messed up we always have the possibility to fast track to stable. If it's not broken then it's not a bug :) amd64 stable x86 stable ppc stable ppc64 stable arm stable Stable on alpha. ia64 stable sparc stable ping ping ping hppa stable Last arch. Closing. |
Created attachment 471292 [details] build.log See tracker bug for details. perl -pe0 bts.ttt l1g8z.pst l1ghz.pst l1gbz.pst l1g8l.pst l1ghl.pst l1gbl.pst >bts1.ttt ./ps_tiny --copy <bts1.ttt >bts2.ttt perl -x hq.pl <bts2.ttt >bts2.tth do "hq.pl" failed, '.' is no longer in @INC; did you mean do "./hq.pl"? at hq.pl line 2. x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG2_H -march=native -mtune=native -O2 -pipe -fsigned-char -fno-rtti -fno-exceptions -ansi -pedantic -Wall -W -c sam2p_main.cpp sam2p_main.cpp:152:1: error: expected primary-expression before ‘;’ token ; ^ make: *** [Makedep:157: sam2p_main.o] Error 1 make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... * ERROR: media-gfx/sam2p-0.49.1::gentoo failed (compile phase): * emake failed PS: Good luck with hq.pl, this is the sort of terror I avoid. I might get brave and circle around it when I have time, but the offending line is probably: ($0=~/(.*)/s);do$1;die$@if$@;__END__+if 0;