Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
hmmm ... sounds a bit cranky! - had a tooth out today :(
BilLK
On Mon, 2009-06-08 at 20:25 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote:
2.1.6.13 was the latest when ... - thats as kindly as I can think of the
person and his reasons for putting me through a lot of work as I didnt
notice the downgrade on one system in time. If it was for security or
other reasons I could understand it, and maybe not agree with it ... but
just because he wanted some extra testing he decided to play with
users systems! I agree with you that portage is usually bug free and
trustworthy ... but the trust aspect has been sorely tried.
On this system, I just left portage at what seemed to be a working
version to avoid the problems caused by the downgrade. This was a few
weeks ago now, so they have probably been sorted, but I think it might
be better to upgrade and find another stable, working version.
BillK
On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 17:11 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:28:21 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote:
* sys-apps/portage
Latest version available: 2.1.6.13
Latest version installed: 2.2_rc15
If you're going to run release candidate versions, at least run the
latest release candidate. rc15 hasn't been in portage for a while, we're
currently on rc33. Add ~sys-apps/portage-2.2 package.{unmask,keywords} to
ensure you have a valid version.
--
William Kenworthy bi...@iinet.net.au
Home in Perth!
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
2.1.6.13 was the latest when ... - thats as kindly as I can think of the
person and his reasons for putting me through a lot of work as I didnt
notice the downgrade on one system in time. If it was for security or
other reasons I could understand it, and maybe not agree with it ... but
just because he wanted some extra testing he decided to play with
users systems! I agree with you that portage is usually bug free and
trustworthy ... but the trust aspect has been sorely tried.
On this system, I just left portage at what seemed to be a working
version to avoid the problems caused by the downgrade. This was a few
weeks ago now, so they have probably been sorted, but I think it might
be better to upgrade and find another stable, working version.
BillK
On Sun, 2009-06-07 at 17:11 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:28:21 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote:
* sys-apps/portage
Latest version available: 2.1.6.13
Latest version installed: 2.2_rc15
If you're going to run release candidate versions, at least run the
latest release candidate. rc15 hasn't been in portage for a while, we're
currently on rc33. Add ~sys-apps/portage-2.2 package.{unmask,keywords} to
ensure you have a valid version.
--
William Kenworthy bi...@iinet.net.au
Home in Perth!
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:25:57 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote: On this system, I just left portage at what seemed to be a working version to avoid the problems caused by the downgrade. I think the key word here is seemed :( -- Neil Bothwick There's no place like ~ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Sunday 07 June 2009 03:28:21 William Kenworthy wrote: As for the OP, I can only guess what might be causing this. Let's start with obvious stuff: 1. Is portage the latest version for your arch? 2. What does revdep-rebuild return? 3. What is your arch, and is it a mixture of stable and ~? The system is quite a few years old - the original install was ~2000, and has quite a few hardware upgrades/rebuilds in between. Current (for at least a couple of years) cpu is amd athlon barton 2500+. Software is a mix of stable, ~x86 and pinned (mostly particular ~x86 at the time) working versions to avoid some of the upgrade treadmill. Your libusb is currently latest, your portage-utils and portage are not. I honestly think that debugging this will be an exercise in futility unless you can find a reference somewhere that says which versions of which portage tools are incompatible with which other ones, and why... I'm also not sure anymore about which portage version was first to support sets. What I did was blow my top at the forced downgrade of portage at Zac's whim, and unmasked portage. Lots of troubles immediately and at once went away when I did this. I'd suggest you switch to ~arch and tolerate the upgrade treadmill. A lot of that is packages that are rapidly and often changing. If you sync and upgrade once a week or fortnight, you'll find you upgrade package X just once, not several times during that period. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
[gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
Alan McKinnon wrote: ... I'm also not sure anymore about which portage version was first to support sets. What I did was blow my top at the forced downgrade of portage at Zac's whim, and unmasked portage. Lots of troubles immediately and at once went away when I did this... Maybe that's why I remember using @preserved-rebuild once or maybe twice. I'm running the same portage now on x86, ~x86, and ~amd64, i.e. 2.1.6.13, which apparently doesn't know about sets. portage-2.2_rc33 is masked on my profiles.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Sunday 07 June 2009 17:21:20 walt wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: ... I'm also not sure anymore about which portage version was first to support sets. What I did was blow my top at the forced downgrade of portage at Zac's whim, and unmasked portage. Lots of troubles immediately and at once went away when I did this... Maybe that's why I remember using @preserved-rebuild once or maybe twice. I'm running the same portage now on x86, ~x86, and ~amd64, i.e. 2.1.6.13, which apparently doesn't know about sets. portage-2.2_rc33 is masked on my profiles. The only reason it's masked is to force as many users as possible to use an earlier version so that it can receive more testing and get better bug reports, and that was done by Zac himself. There is not a single technical or code quality reason for it to be masked, it's purely a human issue Just unmask portage and be done with it, I can't recall the last time there was a valid problem with latest portage reported here so it must have been a very long time ago. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:28:21 +0800, William Kenworthy wrote:
* sys-apps/portage
Latest version available: 2.1.6.13
Latest version installed: 2.2_rc15
If you're going to run release candidate versions, at least run the
latest release candidate. rc15 hasn't been in portage for a while, we're
currently on rc33. Add ~sys-apps/portage-2.2 package.{unmask,keywords} to
ensure you have a valid version.
--
Neil Bothwick
Phasers don't kill people...Unless you set them too high.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes: The only reason it's masked is to force as many users as possible to use an earlier version so that it can receive more testing and get better bug reports, and that was done by Zac himself. There is not a single technical or code quality reason for it to be masked, it's purely a human issue Though I seem to remember that at the time portage 2.2_rc was masked it was stated to only be a temporary measure to force more people to test 2.1.6 and that the mask would be removed when 2.1.6 went stable - which it has been for some while.
[gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
William Kenworthy wrote: After each update, these appear, and for libusb, the number slowly increases (up to 185 now). so far I have done the suggested emerge @preserved-rebuild, plus tried rebuilding every package mentioned but after building, there is no change ... !!! existing preserved libs: package: dev-libs/libusb-0.1.12-r5 * - /lib/libusb.so * used by /lib/udev/check-mtp-device (media-libs/libgphoto2-2.4.3) * used by /usr/bin/dfutool (net-wireless/bluez-utils-3.36) * used by /usr/bin/evolution (mail-client/evolution-2.26.2) * used by 185 other files package: x11-libs/libXaw-1.0.5 * - /usr/lib/libXaw.so.8 * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so.8 * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so.8.0.0 * used by /usr/bin/xgpsspeed (sci-geosciences/gpsd-2.38) Use emerge @preserved-rebuild to rebuild packages using these libraries rattus ~ # Are you using an unstable version of gentoo, e.g. ~x86 or ~amd64? The only reason I know of for 'preserving' an old version is if there is also a newer one, i.e. libusb-1.0.1, which is a ~ version. On my ~amd64 machine I had both libusb-0.1.12-r5 and libusb-1.0.1. I just deleted the 0.1.12 and revdep-rebuild found and rebuilt usbutils, hal, and sane-backends with no problems, so there seems to be no reason to have the old version unless you perhaps have the new version masked on your machine for some reason?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Saturday 06 June 2009 18:23:26 walt wrote: William Kenworthy wrote: After each update, these appear, and for libusb, the number slowly increases (up to 185 now). so far I have done the suggested emerge @preserved-rebuild, plus tried rebuilding every package mentioned but after building, there is no change ... !!! existing preserved libs: package: dev-libs/libusb-0.1.12-r5 * - /lib/libusb.so * used by /lib/udev/check-mtp-device (media-libs/libgphoto2-2.4.3) * used by /usr/bin/dfutool (net-wireless/bluez-utils-3.36) * used by /usr/bin/evolution (mail-client/evolution-2.26.2) * used by 185 other files package: x11-libs/libXaw-1.0.5 * - /usr/lib/libXaw.so.8 * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so.8 * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so.8.0.0 * used by /usr/bin/xgpsspeed (sci-geosciences/gpsd-2.38) Use emerge @preserved-rebuild to rebuild packages using these libraries rattus ~ # Are you using an unstable version of gentoo, e.g. ~x86 or ~amd64? The only reason I know of for 'preserving' an old version is if there is also a newer one, i.e. libusb-1.0.1, which is a ~ version. On my ~amd64 machine I had both libusb-0.1.12-r5 and libusb-1.0.1. I just deleted the 0.1.12 and revdep-rebuild found and rebuilt usbutils, hal, and sane-backends with no problems, so there seems to be no reason to have the old version unless you perhaps have the new version masked on your machine for some reason? Your assessment of the problem is incorrect. preserved-rebuild happens when you upgrade a package which other packages link to and causes brokenness. When the used by package is rebuilt, there is no need for the old live version to be kept (it's only consumers no longer do so) so it is unmerged. Think of it this way: revdep-rebuild finds broken packages after the fact when they are already broken. preserved-rebuild detects those problems before they occur and takes measure to keep the system working meanwhile. You will notice that after running emerge @preserved-rebuild, revdep-rebuild almost invariably returns null results. As for the OP, I can only guess what might be causing this. Let's start with obvious stuff: 1. Is portage the latest version for your arch? 2. What does revdep-rebuild return? 3. What is your arch, and is it a mixture of stable and ~? -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
[gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
Alan McKinnon wrote: ... You will notice that after running emerge @preserved-rebuild, revdep-rebuild almost invariably returns null results... I know I've used the @preserved-rebuild target in the past, but now: #emerge @preserved-rebuild !!! '@preserved-rebuild' is not a valid package atom. !!! Please check ebuild(5) for full details. Would it work if I had any 'preserved' packages on the machine?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Saturday 06 June 2009 23:10:40 walt wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: ... You will notice that after running emerge @preserved-rebuild, revdep-rebuild almost invariably returns null results... I know I've used the @preserved-rebuild target in the past, but now: #emerge @preserved-rebuild !!! '@preserved-rebuild' is not a valid package atom. That looks like a portage version that does not support sets - it doesn't seem to know what '@' means. Did you downgrade portage? !!! Please check ebuild(5) for full details. Would it work if I had any 'preserved' packages on the machine? If the set is empty, the error is something along the lines of set has no members or words to that effect -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
Alan McKinnon wrote: On Saturday 06 June 2009 23:10:40 walt wrote: Alan McKinnon wrote: ... You will notice that after running emerge @preserved-rebuild, revdep-rebuild almost invariably returns null results... I know I've used the @preserved-rebuild target in the past, but now: #emerge @preserved-rebuild !!! '@preserved-rebuild' is not a valid package atom. That looks like a portage version that does not support sets - it doesn't seem to know what '@' means. Did you downgrade portage? Why not post what version of portage you are using? emerge --info should do that. !!! Please check ebuild(5) for full details. Would it work if I had any 'preserved' packages on the machine? If the set is empty, the error is something along the lines of set has no members or words to that effect Looks something like this: r...@smoker / # emerge @preserved-rebuild emerge: 'preserved-rebuild' is an empty set emerge: no targets left after set expansion r...@smoker / # Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: can fix preserved-rebuild ...
On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 19:23 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: On Saturday 06 June 2009 18:23:26 walt wrote: William Kenworthy wrote: After each update, these appear, and for libusb, the number slowly increases (up to 185 now). so far I have done the suggested emerge @preserved-rebuild, plus tried rebuilding every package mentioned but after building, there is no change ... !!! existing preserved libs: package: dev-libs/libusb-0.1.12-r5 * - /lib/libusb.so * used by /lib/udev/check-mtp-device (media-libs/libgphoto2-2.4.3) * used by /usr/bin/dfutool (net-wireless/bluez-utils-3.36) * used by /usr/bin/evolution (mail-client/evolution-2.26.2) * used by 185 other files package: x11-libs/libXaw-1.0.5 * - /usr/lib/libXaw.so.8 * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so.8 * - /usr/lib/libXaw8.so.8.0.0 * used by /usr/bin/xgpsspeed (sci-geosciences/gpsd-2.38) Use emerge @preserved-rebuild to rebuild packages using these libraries rattus ~ # Are you using an unstable version of gentoo, e.g. ~x86 or ~amd64? The only reason I know of for 'preserving' an old version is if there is also a newer one, i.e. libusb-1.0.1, which is a ~ version. rattus ~ # equery l libusb * Searching for libusb ... * installed packages: [I--] [ ] dev-libs/libusb-0.1.12-r5 (0) rattus ~ # ... As for the OP, I can only guess what might be causing this. Let's start with obvious stuff: 1. Is portage the latest version for your arch? 2. What does revdep-rebuild return? 3. What is your arch, and is it a mixture of stable and ~? The system is quite a few years old - the original install was ~2000, and has quite a few hardware upgrades/rebuilds in between. Current (for at least a couple of years) cpu is amd athlon barton 2500+. Software is a mix of stable, ~x86 and pinned (mostly particular ~x86 at the time) working versions to avoid some of the upgrade treadmill. rattus ~ # esearch portage [ Results for search key : portage ] [ Applications found : 5 ] ... * app-portage/portage-utils Latest version available: 0.1.29 Latest version installed: 0.1.29 Size of downloaded files: 77 kB Homepage:http://www.gentoo.org/ Description: small and fast portage helper tools written in C License: GPL-2 * sys-apps/portage Latest version available: 2.1.6.13 Latest version installed: 2.2_rc15 Size of downloaded files: 732 kB Homepage:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/index.xml Description: Portage is the package management and distribution system for Gentoo License: GPL-2 rattus ~ # I think I had installed 2.2_rc15, and then that stupid forced downgrade because someone wanted a version tested came in - I'll try sorting out the portage version first as that looks like a possible culprit. BillK -- William Kenworthy bi...@iinet.net.au Home in Perth!
