[paludis-user] Config-protect is broken, but what's the alternative?

Benjamin R. Haskell paludis at benizi.com
Sun Feb 21 18:11:11 UTC 2010


I just reported a bug[1] wherein a beta version of mysql-community was 
installing a program to /usr/bin/test, overwriting the /usr/bin/test 
that was installed with sys-apps/coreutils.

Turns out the main problem on my part was bad timing (I installed 
mysql-community because mysql>=5.1 was repo masked, but now '-community' 
is repo masked and ~mysql-5.1 was just unmasked today).  But, the other 
part of the response to my report was:

"""
Also, FEATURES="protect-owned" has been a default for a while (or use 
collision-protect there instead).
"""

My initial thought was that "collision-protect" is a broken idea, and I 
found it pretty funny to find that echoed almost verbatim on the Paludis 
FAQ[2]:

"""
collision-protect
    There are various third party hooks that implement this. We might 
start shipping one as a demo hook at some point. Note that 
collision-protect is conceptually broken and you shouldn't be using it.
"""

So, that's all in order...  Except, I can't quite recall the rationale 
for why "collision-protect" is a broken concept.  What's the cleaner 
alternative mechanism that avoids the problem of a package overwriting 
an unrelated package's binary?

-- 
Best,
Ben

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=306213
[2] http://paludis.org/faq/different.html



More information about the paludis-user mailing list