On Saturday 24 December 2005 02:52, Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 02:22:06AM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > Symlinks are handled within portage differently to regular files. Regular > > files get an mtime check and are removed if it matches. Symlinks don't > > get an mtime check (even thought the mtime is stored) and are only > > removed if the symlink's target doesn't exist. Hence, it seems to be this > > way by design. Why it's this way? Who knows. It's been that way for > > longer than anyone can remember which is why _it's so important that bugs > > get filed_. > > Honestly, I thought it was supposed to be like that, since > collision-protect also doesn't protect against packages overwriting > each other's symlinks (package A and package B can both create > /dummy -> bin without any problems from portage).
As far as portage source goes, it is meant to be like that. But as far as portage source goes, installed package information isn't necessary for dep calculation (including depclean)... Most code has been reviewed and the major issues are known by at least one person, but there is still some code that hasn't suffered a close examination (yet alone reworking) such as the code that the above bug hits. > Do you want a bug report for that? Yes, please. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
