Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 134135 - prepstrip breaks RESTRICT=strip
Summary: prepstrip breaks RESTRICT=strip
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Portage Development
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Core (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 115839
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2006-05-23 10:51 UTC by Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED)
Modified: 2006-05-24 04:40 UTC (History)
0 users

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 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-23 10:51:01 UTC
currently prepstrip script has broken handling of RESTRICT=strict:

if hasq nostrip ${FEATURES} ${RESTRICT} || \
   hasq strip RESTRICT
then
        exit 0
fi


this should instead be


if hasq nostrip ${FEATURES} ${RESTRICT} || \
   hasq strip ${RESTRICT}
then
        exit 0
fi

of course :)
Comment 1 Alec Warner (RETIRED) archtester gentoo-dev Security 2006-05-23 10:53:37 UTC
me love you long time,

fixed in r3403
Comment 2 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-23 11:01:36 UTC
prepstrip should not have any calls to hasq.. Who is breaking my scripts?
Comment 3 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2006-05-23 12:08:52 UTC
This has been released in 2.1_rc2-r1.
Comment 4 Simon Stelling (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-24 04:24:28 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> prepstrip should not have any calls to hasq.. Who is breaking my scripts?

i guess that's me. i thought it would be better to use hasq in terms of readability, that's why i replaced it quite some time ago. why shouldn't it use hasq though (willing to learn ;))?
Comment 5 solar (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-05-24 04:40:41 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > prepstrip should not have any calls to hasq.. Who is breaking my scripts?
> 
> i guess that's me. i thought it would be better to use hasq in terms of
> readability, that's why i replaced it quite some time ago. why shouldn't it use
> hasq though (willing to learn ;))?

Well in terms of readability the hasq exists and does make it eaiser to 
understand (sorta). But we are already pretty deep within loops and the 
hasq function introduces yet another loop (read slower).
If you do timing tests of [[ *" foo "* ]] vs hasq the [[ ]] should win everytime. (granted we are probably only talking nanoseconds on a modern box)

Sorry I'm a wee bit territorial with the the ELF handling. So in the future if 
you could please try to poke me or vapier before making changes to our code. (thanks)