On Friday, 27 February 2026 13:13:49 Greenwich Mean Time Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-02-27, Michael wrote: > > You appear to have a rather old Gentoo installation, if ebuilds are > > stored under /usr/portage/packages/. > > But that would be for binary packages, not ebuilds?
My bad, sorry. I meant to write "packages", but the point remains. Currently the default storage for Gentoo's binary packages is in /var/ cache/binhost/gentoo. > > Many changes have taken place since that era, including a new 23.0 > > make.profile, /usr merge, et al. > > At least some of these path changes aren't mandatory, so it's > perfectly possible the system is up-to-date. Sure, Gentoo is flexible enough to allow personal preferences in such matters. > > In addition, your download of the glibc binary looks incomplete - > > notice the .partial suffix. You could try to delete this file and > > try again. > > > > If this is a very old system it will be easier and faster to > > reinstall using a fresh stage 3 archive, than trying to upgrade it > > in situ. Keep your current /etc files, but update/edit your > > make.conf. Also keep your /var/lib/portage/world and the latest > > kernel .config from your existing installation to minimise the > > burden of setting up the new system. > Is it? In my experience grabbing all the pieces and fine-tuning > things, and also dealing with changes that were forced or that > happened because it's a new install, rather than updates on top of > the same install, adds up in complexity. So it's surprising that it's > so often said that reinstalling from scratch is easier. > > Do note that important detail: if you update on top of an existing > system, you'll sometimes get to retain the old default, or you at > least be informed or have the opportunity to update configurations to > account for new defaults or mechanisms. If you install from scratch, > things like /usr/portage will have to be set manually, for just one > example. > > It's probably much easier to follow the suggested procedure of doing > incremental system upgrades based on the past state of the tree at > intervals of X (was it 6?) months. Incremental updates/upgrades can be done, I've upgraded systems which had not been touched for close to 2 years. Other than serving as an exercise to remind myself all the changes which had been introduced by Gentoo in the interim, I just wasted my time and electricity. ;-) I've also upgraded systems by using a fresh stage 3 fs. Other than editing appropriate paths to reflect the new layout and some necessary config choices, I arrived at an updated fully functional system much faster. Using this approach packages had to be emerged once only, to the latest available version. Both approaches should yield the desired result, the first typically takes longer than the latter if the status of the system is significantly out of date. > (Now more on point, why is it trying to handle the .partial file as a > binary package? Wouldn't the point of the suffix be to avoid this?) Also shouldn't the checksum step fail? :-/ > > On Friday, 27 February 2026 06:43:51 Greenwich Mean Time Erwan > > RIGOLLOT> > > wrote: > >> Hello > >> Anyone can help me ? > >> > >> Please. > >> > >> Bien à vous, > >> > >> Erwan RIGOLLOT > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> De : Erwan RIGOLLOT <[email protected]> > >> Envoyé : mercredi, février 25, 2026 10:44:07 AM > >> À : [email protected] <[email protected]> > >> Objet : [gentoo-user] Invalid binary package > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I’m having trouble updating another one gentoo. > >> > >> emerge =sys-libs/glibc-2.34-r14 -av –nodeps > >> I get : > >> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -march=native -O2 -pipe -Wl,-O1 > >> -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,pack-relative-relocs glibc-test.c -o > >> glibc-test ./glibc-test: /lib64/libc.so.6: version > >> `GLIBC_ABI_DT_RELR' not found (required by ./glibc-test) > >> So, I have a problem with glibc. I try to emerge binary package of > >> glibc, but I have another problem : > >> > >> emerge -G glibc -av –nodeps > >> I get : > >> These are the packages that would be merged, in order: > >> > >> [binary U ] sys-libs/glibc-2.42-r5-3:2.2::gentoo > >> [2.33-r7:2.2::gentoo] USE="cet* multiarch ssp (static-libs) -audit > >> -caps -compile-locales (-custom-cflags) -doc -gd -hash-sysv-compat% > >> -headers-only (-multilib*) -multilib-bootstrap -nscd -perl% > >> -profile > >> (-selinux) (-sframe) -stack-realign% -suid (-systemd) -systemtap > >> -test (-vanilla) -verify-sig% (-crypt%) (-static-pie%)" 12 210 KiB > >> > >> Total: 1 package (1 upgrade, 1 binary), Size of downloads: 12 210 > >> KiB > >> > >> Would you like to merge these packages? [Yes/No] Yes > >> > >> …. > >> > >> Saving to: > >> ‘/usr/portage/packages/sys-libs/glibc-2.42-r5.tbz2.partial’ > >> > >> /usr/portage/packages/sys-libs/glibc-2.42-r5.tbz2.partial > >> 100%[============================================================== > >> == > >> =================================================================== > >> === ==>] 11,92M --.-KB/s in 0,1s > >> > >> 2026-02-25 10:33:04 (119 MB/s) - > >> ‘/usr/portage/packages/sys-libs/glibc-2.42-r5.tbz2.partial’ saved > >> [12503040/12503040] > >> > >> * glibc-2.42-r5.tbz2 MD5 SHA1 size ;-) ... > >> > >> [ ok ] !!! Invalid binary package: > >> '/usr/portage/packages/sys-libs/glibc-2.42-r5.tbz2.partial' > >> /usr/lib/portage/python3.9/ebuild.sh: line 657: > >> /var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.42-r5/build-info/glibc-2.42-r5.eb > >> ui > >> ld: No such file or directory > >> I can give more details for any step. > >> my only goal is to have a Gentoo up-to-date but I prefer update > >> than > >> reinstall. > >> > >> Thanks for your help ! > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> Erwan RIGOLLOT
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
