53121 – Failure during emerge for glibc-2.3.3.20040420

Bug 53121 - Failure during emerge for glibc-2.3.3.20040420

Summary: Failure during emerge for glibc-2.3.3.20040420

Status:	RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 53107

Alias:	None

Product:	Gentoo Linux
Classification:	Unclassified
Component:	New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware:	x86 Linux

Importance:	High blocker (vote)
Assignee:	Gentoo Linux bug wranglers

URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2004-06-06 03:02 UTC by Daniel Miller
Modified:	2005-07-17 13:06 UTC (History)
CC List:	1 user (show)

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

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description Daniel Miller 2004-06-06 03:02:58 UTC

During the emerge, there is a failure message.  I believe there is a typo in the version number.  Since I'm not a developer, I don't know where to look, but the relevant line refers to $EPATCH_SOURCE.  The ebuild is looking for glibc-3.3.3-etc, and I believe that should be glibc-2.3.3-etc

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1. emerge sync
2. emerge -U system
3.

Actual Results:  
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking glibc-2.3.2.tar.bz2 to /var/tmp/portage/glibc-2.3.3.20040420/work

 * Cannot find $EPATCH_SOURCE!  Value for $EPATCH_SOURCE is:
 *
 *   /usr/portage/distfiles/glibc-3.3.3-branch-update-20040420.patch.bz2


!!! ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.3.3.20040420 failed.
!!! Function epatch, Line 182, Exitcode 0
!!! Cannot find $EPATCH_SOURCE!

Comment 1 André Terpstra 2004-06-06 03:12:02 UTC

Same problem here.

Comment 2 André Terpstra 2004-06-06 03:14:42 UTC

By the way, this is a duplicate of 53120, I think.

Comment 3 André Terpstra 2004-06-06 03:16:53 UTC

And, #53107 already seems to contain the solution...

Comment 4 Colin Tinker 2004-06-06 04:17:34 UTC

changing line 267 in the ebuild to 2.3.3 from 3.3.3 fixed it for me.

Comment 5 Ciaran McCreesh 2004-06-06 11:31:51 UTC

I always wondered... If two is a "dupe", is three a "tripe"?

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 53107 ***