1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.GENTOO.DEV

  • [gentoo-dev] No stable firejail

    From Oskari Pirhonen@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 21 02:00:01 2022
    Hi,

    After updating my system and running `eclean-dist --deep`, I noticed the following output:

    The following unavailable installed packages were found
    sys-apps/firejail-0.9.64.4

    Was removing the stable version of sys-apps/firejail intentional? The
    ebuild commit message says "Upstream released security bump", so it
    sounds plausible.

    I'm OK with manually keywording `=sys-apps/firejail-0.9.68`, but I
    generally prefer stable packages where I can. Also, I find it
    interesting that a package that previously had a stable version no
    longer does. I've used Gentoo since ~2016, and off the top of my head, I
    can't think of another instance of something like this occurring (with
    the set of packages I have installed).

    - Oskari

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iHUEABYIAB0WIQQfOU+JeXjo4uxN6vCp8he9GGIfEQUCYhLhpAAKCRCp8he9GGIf ER2UAQDYvAdod6owGHQZ7w+ofsc57XNPCBV94g8TJs/1Pyp4QgD/dMiTxKyTFXac LW2xSkqtmmk1dbW5svtNxnQuxPH0Cg4=
    =dMjp
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Sam James@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 21 02:50:01 2022
    On 21 Feb 2022, at 00:49, Oskari Pirhonen <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hi,

    After updating my system and running `eclean-dist --deep`, I noticed the following output:

    The following unavailable installed packages were found
    sys-apps/firejail-0.9.64.4

    Was removing the stable version of sys-apps/firejail intentional? The
    ebuild commit message says "Upstream released security bump", so it
    sounds plausible.

    I'm OK with manually keywording `=sys-apps/firejail-0.9.68`, but I
    generally prefer stable packages where I can. Also, I find it
    interesting that a package that previously had a stable version no
    longer does. I've used Gentoo since ~2016, and off the top of my head, I can't think of another instance of something like this occurring (with
    the set of packages I have installed).


    Just a mistake. Probably better for bugs.gentoo.org. Fixed, thanks.

    Best,
    sam


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQGTBAEBCgB9FiEEYOpPv/uDUzOcqtTy9JIoEO6gSDsFAmIS71xfFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDYw RUE0RkJGRkI4MzUzMzM5Q0FBRDRGMkY0OTIyODEwRUVBMDQ4M0IACgkQ9JIoEO6g SDu1/ggAsPJXrKkGIrY+H28Mq428kn7FCaVa8iA4wrQeaf16ez2K28xWIoeZWqNL zaw1bos5L9Wv5SDGrkEA3GraLDoXizobEaWhAOHeSCAaYlHTMyVpOrZ0kA9cTbNL vZJImMvOn4tgTtuW04+a/A+WRUpGuchQ/tEZp9OxWr5kL+jGQZ50DG7vM6aKpBYI YVGJbCubAwx6zfnrY9JXALrkSW62cwQAvcgocnyOLpYqhyzjGrsOjCWwB8JhGV+a RHkpE96kf7FXTYIzb3KoP1NWJJqSooszetGWF96Sv380QLUEV+kiJHzuGYLUY8tr rjLlJawBTTLaYIwvdoVhXS0EzromwA==
    =kAxA
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)