Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 136611 - repoman and ebuild confused by symlinks
Summary: repoman and ebuild confused by symlinks
Alias: None
Product: Portage Development
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Repoman (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High normal (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
Depends on:
Reported: 2006-06-12 22:59 UTC by Olivier Crete (RETIRED)
Modified: 2007-01-28 09:42 UTC (History)
0 users

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


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Olivier Crete (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-06-12 22:59:30 UTC
Normally, I use a regular rsync tree, and on top of that, I have an overlay with various stuff, including symlinks from my CVS tree. With version 2.0.5x, I was able to go into the symlinked directories in the overlay and operate portage commands such as ebuild digest or repoman and portage would be smart enough to know it should refer to the cvs tree.. Portage 2.1 seems confused, sometimes it tries to refer to the overlay and sometimes to the CVS tree.. 
When doing an ebuild digest I got:
getfetchlist aux_get() error reading x11-misc/googleearth-4_beta ...
So I copied the files into my overlay instead of symlinking them, that fixed it..
But then repoman wouldn't run because it wasnt run from a full tree, so I had to move them back to my cvs tree..
Comment 1 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2006-06-12 23:20:44 UTC
I'm not sure that this particular case is worth supporting.  Wouldn't it make sense to copy the directory from your cvs tree to overlay, rather than symlink it?  Note that the behavior has been changed in order to support the case where the root path of the overlay contains one or more symlinks (bug 109961).
Comment 2 Olivier Crete (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-06-13 06:23:54 UTC
well the current behavior is broken because ebuild digest didnt work at all with the symlinked directory and there is no reason for that.
Comment 3 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2006-06-13 06:41:35 UTC
Well, there's a reason for everything.  My feeling is that this use case is less common than the other, so I'd rather not revert the changes.  This case can certainly be fixed with a little work...
Comment 4 Olivier Crete (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2006-06-13 07:40:11 UTC
I'll try to have a look at the code to see if I can fix it.
Comment 5 Marius Mauch (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-01-28 09:42:06 UTC
Reopen if you have something