Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
On 2013-08-28 7:24 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 07:04:39 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: So... is 2.2 *ever* going to go stable??? Give it a chance! It's only just come out of rc. Until recently it wasn't even available in testing without umasking. Ok, sorry, I totally missed the significance, didn't even notice that it meant it had come out of RC. I was just going by the fact that it has been around for - what, years? - with never-ending beta/rc releases, and I just thought this was another new rc or something... So, glad to hear it might actually be getting close now... :)
Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:27:30 -0400, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I know that several readers have used 2.2 for years with success. The commands will, but there may be better alternatives in 2.2. Man page time :) -- Neil Bothwick A snooze button is a poor substitute for no alarm clock at all. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
On 2013-08-27 5:27 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I was away for two weeks. I just resynced and see that 2.2.1 is now in testing (and my current version 2.1.13.1 is not in the tree). Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I know that several readers have used 2.2 for years with success. So... is 2.2 *ever* going to go stable???
Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
On 28/08/2013 13:04, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2013-08-27 5:27 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I was away for two weeks. I just resynced and see that 2.2.1 is now in testing (and my current version 2.1.13.1 is not in the tree). Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I know that several readers have used 2.2 for years with success. So... is 2.2 *ever* going to go stable??? 100+ alpha/beta releases 200+ rc releases what do you think? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 07:04:39 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: So... is 2.2 *ever* going to go stable??? Give it a chance! It's only just come out of rc. Until recently it wasn't even available in testing without umasking. -- Neil Bothwick Does fuzzy logic tickle? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I was away for two weeks. I just resynced and see that 2.2.1 is now in testing (and my current version 2.1.13.1 is not in the tree). Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I know that several readers have used 2.2 for years with success. thanks, allan I use unstable here and the only difference I have seen is the addition of more options, better handling of blocks and such as that. I would upgrade and then give the man page a good looking over. You may find some things there that interest you and may be helpful in some situations. I don't recall any commands changing tho. Still emerge and such. Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64
On Tue, Aug 27 2013, Dale wrote: gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I was away for two weeks. I just resynced and see that 2.2.1 is now in testing (and my current version 2.1.13.1 is not in the tree). Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I know that several readers have used 2.2 for years with success. thanks, allan I use unstable here and the only difference I have seen is the addition of more options, better handling of blocks and such as that. I would upgrade and then give the man page a good looking over. You may find some things there that interest you and may be helpful in some situations. I don't recall any commands changing tho. Still emerge and such. Hope that helps. Dale I does indeed. Thanks, allan
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/2013 12:00, Pavel Volkov wrote: What is the status or portage 2.2? It takes so long to get out of alpha. Has anyone here had any serious problems with it? I've been using it for a a few years without any accidents. Just wondering if I should be prepared for the worst. I also remember reading in Changelog that 2.2 remains masked until 2.1 gets enough testing, that was ages ago. It initially suported set arithmetic (you could writes expressions like @set1+@set2/@set3), I wonder why it was dropped :) you've been using it for years, it has gone through 186 alpha versions and before that just over 100 pre versions. You never had a problem with it. Neither has anyone else really. So what are you worried about again? Just pretend that alpha isn't in the name and it isn't masked - effectively that is actual status - last I heard from Zac there is one or two odd edge cases that still aren't 100% right, but few people ever run into them. You are highly unlikely to be one of those few people. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/13 at 02:00pm, Pavel Volkov wrote: It initially suported set arithmetic (you could writes expressions like @set1+@set2/@set3), I wonder why it was dropped :) Wow thats intresting. What could the / operator possibly do in the case of sets? -- - Yohan Pereira The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal. -- Mark Twain
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:00:54 +0400, Pavel Volkov wrote: It initially suported set arithmetic (you could writes expressions like @set1+@set2/@set3), I wonder why it was dropped :) What does that mean? set1 and one of set2 or set 3? Or both set1 and set2 or set3 only? I'm not sure how this would be useful but I can certainly see how it would cause confusion and problems, but I hadn't heard if it before. -- Neil Bothwick Of course it's not your day, With 7 billion people on earth chances are slim it will ever be *your* day. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/2013 12:17, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:00:54 +0400, Pavel Volkov wrote: It initially suported set arithmetic (you could writes expressions like @set1+@set2/@set3), I wonder why it was dropped :) What does that mean? set1 and one of set2 or set 3? Or both set1 and set2 or set3 only? I'm not sure how this would be useful but I can certainly see how it would cause confusion and problems, but I hadn't heard if it before. It's standard mathematical set operators. In maths, a set is defined as a collection of well-defined objects. Sets have no dupes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_%28mathematics%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_theory Sets have several well-defined operations that can be done on them: union, intersection, difference plus a few others. @set1+@set2/@set3 reduces to: all the elements of set1 and set2 without the elements that are in set3 (/ is difference). As an example, assume portage ships two sets @kde and @kdedev: @kde kdeadmin-meta kdebase-meta kdemultimedia-meta kdepim-meta ... @kdedev kdewebdev-meta kdebindings-meta kdesdk-meta However, kmail sucks and akonadi sucks moar, so define for yourself @suckykde kdepim-meta And add to your world sets: @kde+@kdedev/@suckykde effectively giving you kde without kde-pim. Without operators, you have to copy-paste an existing set and maually remove the entriess you don't want. Useful, not so? Well, it all gets extremely murky very very quickly. Portage applies more than just mathematical sets, there's this concept of deps that are not part of set theory. What if something in set1 has a dep, and that dep is listed in set3 and must be removed. To resolve this, you must have precedence rules and must ignore something. You either ignore set3 and install anyway, or throw a blocker and say the item is required in set1. Either way there's no clean way to do it and lots of users are going to get annoyed. Not to mention the extra bug reports -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Yohan Pereira yohan.pere...@gmail.comwrote: On 24/07/13 at 02:00pm, Pavel Volkov wrote: It initially suported set arithmetic (you could writes expressions like @set1+@set2/@set3), I wonder why it was dropped :) Wow thats intresting. What could the / operator possibly do in the case of sets? I'm not sure about the correct notation but I think it was intersection.
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/2013 12:52, Pavel Volkov wrote: On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Yohan Pereira yohan.pere...@gmail.com mailto:yohan.pere...@gmail.com wrote: On 24/07/13 at 02:00pm, Pavel Volkov wrote: It initially suported set arithmetic (you could writes expressions like @set1+@set2/@set3), I wonder why it was dropped :) Wow thats intresting. What could the / operator possibly do in the case of sets? I'm not sure about the correct notation but I think it was intersection. Difference actually :-) I can't think how intersection could be generally useful in portage sets. Maybe it was in the first draft just for completeness? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 12:46:59 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: What does that mean? set1 and one of set2 or set 3? Or both set1 and set2 or set3 only? I'm not sure how this would be useful but I can certainly see how it would cause confusion and problems, but I hadn't heard if it before. It's standard mathematical set operators. In maths, a set is defined as a collection of well-defined objects. Sets have no dupes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_%28mathematics%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_theory Sets have several well-defined operations that can be done on them: union, intersection, difference plus a few others. @set1+@set2/@set3 reduces to: all the elements of set1 and set2 without the elements that are in set3 (/ is difference). As an example, assume portage ships two sets @kde and @kdedev: @kde kdeadmin-meta kdebase-meta kdemultimedia-meta kdepim-meta ... @kdedev kdewebdev-meta kdebindings-meta kdesdk-meta However, kmail sucks and akonadi sucks moar, so define for yourself @suckykde kdepim-meta And add to your world sets: @kde+@kdedev/@suckykde I see, what about operator precedence, is that equivalent to (@kde+@kdedev)/@kdesuckykde or @kde+(@kdedev/@kdesuckykde) It's been a long time since I studied set operators at Uni :( -- Neil Bothwick I cna ytpe 300 wrods pre mniuet!!! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/2013 15:20, Neil Bothwick wrote: However, kmail sucks and akonadi sucks moar, so define for yourself @suckykde kdepim-meta And add to your world sets: @kde+@kdedev/@suckykde I see, what about operator precedence, is that equivalent to (@kde+@kdedev)/@kdesuckykde or @kde+(@kdedev/@kdesuckykde) It's been a long time since I studied set operators at Uni :( I think it's the former. But I've been known to be wrong on things (lately, more often than not...) Just looked on The Google, and there's no consensus I can find. Best advice seems to be that union and difference are equal precedence so the expression is evaluated left to right. Hence it's the former :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 07/24/2013 09:27 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: I think it's the former. But I've been known to be wrong on things (lately, more often than not...) Just looked on The Google, and there's no consensus I can find. Best advice seems to be that union and difference are equal precedence so the expression is evaluated left to right. Hence it's the former :-) You can rewrite (A \\ B) as (A !B), giving you one less case to worry about. But, some people (most notably, programming languages) assign a higher priority to intersection () than they do to union (||). Of course, mathematically, they should probably have the same priority, so many people do the left-to-right thing. So in practice, you'd better use parentheses if you want anyone to know WTF you're talking about.
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:46:59PM +0200, Penguin Lover Alan McKinnon squawked: @set1+@set2/@set3 reduces to: all the elements of set1 and set2 without the elements that are in set3 (/ is difference). Speaking as a mathematician (and A. Gottlieb will agree with me), I would be rather annoyed that they chose (if this is not a misquote from the original proposed documentation) to use '/' for set difference instead of '\' as it is supposed to be. Humph. W -- Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire et vice versa ~~~ I. Newton
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On Wed, Jul 24 2013, Willie WY Wong wrote: Speaking as a mathematician (and A. Gottlieb will agree with me), I would be rather annoyed that they chose (if this is not a misquote from the original proposed documentation) to use '/' for set difference instead of '\' as it is supposed to be. I was also surprised to see `/'. A part of me was going to send about quotient groups (the normal usage of '/') but I managed to refrain myself. However, now that willie has opened the door ... / is normally used for quotients. For example, if we take the group Z of integers under addition and the subgroup 2Z of the even integers, then Z / 2Z is the quotient that results from taking Z and identifying all the elements of 2Z. So in Z / 2Z, all the even integers are zero and hence all odd integers are equivalent (since they differ by even integers, which are zero). Thus the quotient has only 2 elements and is the familiar group Z2, the integers mod 2. The above can be generalized. allan
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/2013 22:15, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: On Wed, Jul 24 2013, Willie WY Wong wrote: Speaking as a mathematician (and A. Gottlieb will agree with me), I would be rather annoyed that they chose (if this is not a misquote from the original proposed documentation) to use '/' for set difference instead of '\' as it is supposed to be. I was also surprised to see `/'. A part of me was going to send about quotient groups (the normal usage of '/') but I managed to refrain myself. However, now that willie has opened the door ... / is normally used for quotients. For example, if we take the group Z of integers under addition and the subgroup 2Z of the even integers, then Z / 2Z is the quotient that results from taking Z and identifying all the elements of 2Z. So in Z / 2Z, all the even integers are zero and hence all odd integers are equivalent (since they differ by even integers, which are zero). Thus the quotient has only 2 elements and is the familiar group Z2, the integers mod 2. The above can be generalized. allan In portage's defense, the symbol used is not really mathematical notation, it's an operator used in code, and only in code. We do this lots: * is multiplication ^ is exponentiation % is modulus (sometimes just mod) and several more, all driven by the lack of appropriate symbols on early ASCII keyboards (and the majority of current keyboards...) I would probably have selected / as well if I were the implementer, but that's because I heavily resist using backslash for anything other than escapes. My brain usually will not let me go against this one... You mathematician chaps could probably resolve this one nicely for yourselves by treating it as just another mangle by Applied Mathematicians == joke :-) -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On Wed, Jul 24 2013, Alan McKinnon wrote: You mathematician chaps could probably resolve this one nicely for yourselves by treating it as just another mangle by Applied Mathematicians == joke :-) Careful what you joke about. The New York University comp sci dept (my home) is part the Courant Institute that also contains the very highly regarded NYU math department, one that *emphasizes* applied math. :-) allan
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2
On 24/07/2013 23:21, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: On Wed, Jul 24 2013, Alan McKinnon wrote: You mathematician chaps could probably resolve this one nicely for yourselves by treating it as just another mangle by Applied Mathematicians == joke :-) Careful what you joke about. The New York University comp sci dept (my home) is part the Courant Institute that also contains the very highly regarded NYU math department, one that *emphasizes* applied math. :-) allan Oops :-) If I told you my closest colleague at work (who designs the algorithms for most of the code I maintain) has a masters in pure Mathematics - would we then at least be even? -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Saturday 15 November 2008 01:24:18 Paul Hartman wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 15 November 2008 01:07:33 Paul Hartman wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I ve upgraded to portage-2.2 . From that time i am having a problem. When portage finds a collision between two files during the merge time , it complains and doesnt merge the new package. The weird thing is that i do not have collision-protect under FEATURES on /etc/make.conf file Any idea how to deal with that? Check to see which other package owns the collided file. If none, it's probably safe to delete it emerge the new package (which will replace that file anyway). That's what I do. Paul This usually happens when I am trying to install slotted packages like amarok-1.94 I am using amarok-1.4.10 and I am trying to install amarok-1.94. They are on different slots but portage keeps complaining about collisions. Since I do not have collision-protect on FEATURES, portage MUST merge the package even if it warns me... What about protect-owned, do you have that? It is like collision-protect, but it blocks you from overwriting files KNOWN to belong to other packages (where collisiion-protect will block any file on disk, even if it has no owning-package) There are also environment variables which explicitly protect/override collision detection for directories, regardless of the features setting. Paul This is my FEATURES line FEATURES=parallel-fetch buildpkg candy fixpackages ccache sandbox Could some of these be responsible for the collision problem? -- Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:40:25 +0200, Markos Chandras wrote: I do not have collision-protect on FEATURES, portage MUST merge the package even if it warns me... This is my FEATURES line FEATURES=parallel-fetch buildpkg candy fixpackages ccache sandbox You don't have -collision-protect either, so it could be on by default in your profile. What do you get from emerge --info | grep FEATURES -- Neil Bothwick Why is it that when you transport something by car it's called shipment, but when you transport it by ship it's called cargo? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Saturday 15 November 2008 14:27:49 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:40:25 +0200, Markos Chandras wrote: I do not have collision-protect on FEATURES, portage MUST merge the package even if it warns me... This is my FEATURES line FEATURES=parallel-fetch buildpkg candy fixpackages ccache sandbox You don't have -collision-protect either, so it could be on by default in your profile. What do you get from emerge --info | grep FEATURES Ah that got me some extra features FEATURES=buildpkg candy ccache distlocks fixpackages parallel-fetch preserve-libs protect-owned sandbox sfperms strict unmerge-orphans userfetch So , as you can see protect-owned is on as you told me before What if I add under FEATURES , -protect-owned? . Could this solve my problem? -- Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
Yes, in the same way that disconnecting the warning lamp fixes the low oil pressure problem in your car :( -- Neil Bothwick On 15 Nov 2008, 2:06 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 15 November 2008 14:27:49 Neil Bothwick wrote: On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:40:25 +0200, Mar... Ah that got me some extra features FEATURES=buildpkg candy ccache distlocks fixpackages parallel-fetch preserve-libs protect-owned sandbox sfperms strict unmerge-orphans userfetch So , as you can see protect-owned is on as you told me before What if I add under FEATURES , -protect-owned? . Could this solve my problem? -- Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Saturday 15 November 2008 16:23:51 Neil Bothwick wrote: Yes, in the same way that disconnecting the warning lamp fixes the low oil pressure problem in your car :( I agree that this is a wrong way to fix it. First of all am gonna fill a bug about amarok and I ll act accordingly Thanks -- Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I ve upgraded to portage-2.2 . From that time i am having a problem. When portage finds a collision between two files during the merge time , it complains and doesnt merge the new package. The weird thing is that i do not have collision-protect under FEATURES on /etc/make.conf file Any idea how to deal with that? Check to see which other package owns the collided file. If none, it's probably safe to delete it emerge the new package (which will replace that file anyway). That's what I do. Paul
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Saturday 15 November 2008 01:07:33 Paul Hartman wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I ve upgraded to portage-2.2 . From that time i am having a problem. When portage finds a collision between two files during the merge time , it complains and doesnt merge the new package. The weird thing is that i do not have collision-protect under FEATURES on /etc/make.conf file Any idea how to deal with that? Check to see which other package owns the collided file. If none, it's probably safe to delete it emerge the new package (which will replace that file anyway). That's what I do. Paul This usually happens when I am trying to install slotted packages like amarok-1.94 I am using amarok-1.4.10 and I am trying to install amarok-1.94. They are on different slots but portage keeps complaining about collisions. Since I do not have collision-protect on FEATURES, portage MUST merge the package even if it warns me... -- Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-user] portage-2.2 + collision protect
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 15 November 2008 01:07:33 Paul Hartman wrote: On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Markos Chandras [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, I ve upgraded to portage-2.2 . From that time i am having a problem. When portage finds a collision between two files during the merge time , it complains and doesnt merge the new package. The weird thing is that i do not have collision-protect under FEATURES on /etc/make.conf file Any idea how to deal with that? Check to see which other package owns the collided file. If none, it's probably safe to delete it emerge the new package (which will replace that file anyway). That's what I do. Paul This usually happens when I am trying to install slotted packages like amarok-1.94 I am using amarok-1.4.10 and I am trying to install amarok-1.94. They are on different slots but portage keeps complaining about collisions. Since I do not have collision-protect on FEATURES, portage MUST merge the package even if it warns me... What about protect-owned, do you have that? It is like collision-protect, but it blocks you from overwriting files KNOWN to belong to other packages (where collisiion-protect will block any file on disk, even if it has no owning-package) There are also environment variables which explicitly protect/override collision detection for directories, regardless of the features setting. Paul
