TLDR: Let's remove FEATURES="stricter" from developer profile, I bet
most people have it disabled anyway and it doesn't seem useful.

I recently started more testing in one of my stable chroots, and I
switched it to the developer profile. During the update the following
error happened:

>  * QA Notice: Package has poor programming practices which may compile
>  *            fine but exhibit random runtime failures.
>  * gam_listener.c:101: warning: implicit declaration of function 
> 'gam_exclude_check'
>  * gam_server.c:624: warning: implicit declaration of function 
> 'gam_error_init'
>  * gam_connection.c:402: warning: implicit declaration of function 
> 'gam_exclude_check'
>  * gam_inotify.c:145: warning: implicit declaration of function 
> 'gam_poll_basic_init'
> 
>  * Please do not file a Gentoo bug and instead report the above QA
>  * issues directly to the upstream developers of this software.
>  * Homepage: http://www.gnome.org/~veillard/gamin/
>  * ERROR: app-admin/gam-server-0.1.10 failed:
>  *   install aborted due to poor programming practices shown above
>  *
>  * Call stack:
>  *   misc-functions.sh, line 992:  Called install_qa_check
>  *   misc-functions.sh, line 688:  Called die
>  * The specific snippet of code:
>  *                              has stricter ${FEATURES} && die "install 
> aborted due to" \

Which is of course for a package I'm not a developer of. It seems to me
that any people who use the developer profile productively have already
disabled FEATURES="stricter". In fact, I've done so in my development VM.

I suggest that we remove FEATURES="stricter" from developer profile's
defaults.

/usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults:FEATURES="collision-protect
multilib-strict sign splitdebug stricter test test-fail-continue
userpriv usersandbox"

An alternative solution would be to make misc-functions.sh not bail out
on errors beyond control of most people, but that's an order of
magnitude more complicated.

Thoughts?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to