Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove old versions of media-gfx/blender #25914

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

f-denkena
Copy link
Contributor

Closes:https://bugs.gentoo.org/834011
Signed-off-by: Federico Denkena federico.denkena@posteo.de

@gentoo-bot
Copy link

Pull Request assignment

Submitter: @f-denkena
Areas affected: ebuilds
Packages affected: media-gfx/blender

media-gfx/blender: @redchillipadi, @DarkDefender, @gentoo/proxy-maint

Linked bugs

Bugs linked: 834011


In order to force reassignment and/or bug reference scan, please append [please reassign] to the pull request title.

Docs: Code of ConductCopyright policy (expl.) ● DevmanualGitHub PRsProxy-maint guide

@gentoo-bot gentoo-bot added assigned PR successfully assigned to the package maintainer(s). bug linked Bug/Closes found in footer, and cross-linked with the PR. security PR that needs to be merged promptly as it addresses security issues labels Jun 15, 2022
@thesamesam
Copy link
Member

I think you may have manually fiddled with the manifest. I'd restore it, git rm the bad ebuilds, then pkgdev manifest.

@f-denkena
Copy link
Contributor Author

f-denkena commented Jun 16, 2022

yeah, but for that I'll have to get a real development environment up and running

@f-denkena f-denkena force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from 9746390 to 375789f Compare June 17, 2022 07:15
@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2022-06-17 07:21 UTC
Newest commit scanned: 9746390
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/ea8fb92905/output.html

@f-denkena
Copy link
Contributor Author

@DarkDefender I hope it's okay to remove some unused USE variables

@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2022-06-17 07:36 UTC
Newest commit scanned: 375789f
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/7823987828/output.html

@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2022-06-17 08:20 UTC
Newest commit scanned: 8fb3ac9
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/1d4782c202/output.html

@DarkDefender
Copy link
Contributor

Why are you removing patches used by the 2.93.9 ebuild?

@f-denkena
Copy link
Contributor Author

I thought they were labeled 3.01 and used by that version... not really familiar with ebuilds yet

@DarkDefender
Copy link
Contributor

As far as I know they are still needed.

I think that you should test out these things before you try to commit any changes.
Otherwise you have no clue if you are breaking working ebuilds or not.

Closes:https://bugs.gentoo.org/834011
Signed-off-by: Federico Denkena <federico.denkena@posteo.de>
@gentoo-repo-qa-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Pull request CI report

Report generated at: 2022-06-17 16:36 UTC
Newest commit scanned: c43d005
Status: ✅ good

There are existing issues already. Please look into the report to make sure none of them affect the packages in question:
https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/bd5973aa4d/output.html

@f-denkena
Copy link
Contributor Author

did run some tests, you were absolutely right and I'll have to thank you for reminding me about this one...

@thesamesam
Copy link
Member

Thanks! I've fixed the commit message format (should be cat/pkg: foo) and added a missing space after the : in the Bug tag.

(Use Bug, not Closes, for security bugs.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
assigned PR successfully assigned to the package maintainer(s). bug linked Bug/Closes found in footer, and cross-linked with the PR. security PR that needs to be merged promptly as it addresses security issues
Projects
None yet
5 participants