Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 120920 - net-news/rol Removal Request
Summary: net-news/rol Removal Request
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Unspecified (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Gentoo TreeCleaner Project
URL:
Whiteboard: PENDING REMOVAL August 15th
Keywords:
: 138776 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-01-30 03:43 UTC by Peter Volkov (RETIRED)
Modified: 2007-05-31 10:54 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Peter Volkov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-01-30 03:43:51 UTC
I've looked at net-news/rol as it has virtual/x11 dependency. Well rol-0.2* depends on gtk+ and rol-0.3* on gtkmm and does not have any linking with X libs, thus I removed that virtual/x11 dependency (modular X deps are fixed :) ).

Compilation clean and rol-0.2.x (currently stable) works for me. Problems are with rol-0.3.x (unstable). First it has =dev-cpp/gtkmm-2.2.11 dependency. This library version has compilation problems (see bug 49350). So I compiled it with =dev-cpp/gtkmm-2.2* and found that it does not work. I did not manage to get any feed names and pressing remove last site button in preferences dialog crashes application (I've check both rol-0.3.0 and 0.3.1). There are also other crashes. So I think rol-0.3.x versions are unworkable.

I've attempted to contact upstream 3 days ago, but still did not receive any answer.

Can anybody reproduce broken behavior? If so I'd like to hardmask rol-0.3.x versions for about month, then attempt to contact upstream again and if upstream is dead remove 0.3.x versions from the tree and hard mask rol-0.2.x to remove it also in another month. What do you think about such plan?
Comment 1 Andrej Kacian (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-01-30 05:37:23 UTC
From file timestamps inside the tarball, I'd say this project is pretty much dead.  Feel free to p.mask it, but give upstream more time to respond - two weeks should be sufficient, IMHO.

I'll test it later today after I'll get back from work.
Comment 2 Michael Hanselmann (hansmi) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-02-03 09:05:13 UTC
I'm really wondering why I'm on the CC of this bug 
Comment 3 Michael Hanselmann (hansmi) (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-02-03 09:05:13 UTC
I'm really wondering why I'm on the CC of this bug  can you explain it to me?
Comment 4 Peter Volkov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-02-04 08:44:40 UTC
By mistake. I'm sorry about that.

metadata in net-news/rol is empty thus I CC'ed developers from ChangeLog and by mistake I added you.
Comment 5 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-07-02 00:47:46 UTC
*** Bug 138776 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 6 Jakub Moc (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-07-02 00:48:37 UTC
So? I'd suggest to punt the broken version at least...
Comment 7 Peter Volkov (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-07-11 11:15:20 UTC
Nothing changed for 0.5 year so my opinion is that time to clean this package from the tree comes. :( Reassigning bug on treecleaners.
Comment 8 Alec Warner (RETIRED) archtester gentoo-dev Security 2006-09-02 18:01:18 UTC
Removed.