It appears that pkgconf no longer supports passing an absolute path to a .pc file. % pkgconf --modversion /usr/share/pkgconfig/udev.pc <no output> This breaks the install QA check, which does this: > for f in "${files[@]}" ; do > local file_version=$(pkg-config --modversion "${f}")
Looks like a regression in pkgconf. I created an issue upstream.
The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=275cca8da0e139ce9375bd90727da18c416f56f1 commit 275cca8da0e139ce9375bd90727da18c416f56f1 Author: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-08-19 12:18:16 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-08-19 12:18:16 +0000 profiles: mask pkgconf-2* again Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/911721 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912461 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912581 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> profiles/package.mask | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=8f31c5a32dc20a57764a9b073cf989e9cf2ea615 commit 8f31c5a32dc20a57764a9b073cf989e9cf2ea615 Author: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-09-03 04:30:44 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-09-03 04:32:49 +0000 dev-util/pkgconf: add 2.0.3 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/911721 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912843 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912461 Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912581 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> dev-util/pkgconf/Manifest | 1 + dev-util/pkgconf/pkgconf-2.0.3.ebuild | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 70 insertions(+) Additionally, it has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=5dea9db406aea15a140294d30af8317762f69461 commit 5dea9db406aea15a140294d30af8317762f69461 Author: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2023-09-03 04:32:00 +0000 Commit: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2023-09-03 04:32:51 +0000 profiles: unmask pkgconf-2 again We really do need this unmasked if we can given the protobuf performance issue. Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/911721 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912843 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912461 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/912581 Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> profiles/package.mask | 4 ---- 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
