The /etc/installurl file is not present on either of my 'current' systems. Reading the man pages, it looks to me like installurl is related to the new syspatch facility, which I believe is for tracking the STABLE branch. As I said, I'm running CURRENT, so if I've got all this right, the fact that /etc/installurl isn't present on my systems is not surprising.
Also, if you look at the pkg_add man page, PKG_PATH is documented without any mention that it is deprecated. I'm pretty sure I can work around this problem by building the rust port, though I think it takes quite a while to do this. But I'm still puzzled that a 'current' package would be looking for a libc version newer than that supplied by the latest snapshot. On 5 May 2017 at 19:47, Kapfhammer, Stefan <sk...@skapf.de> wrote: > Hello Donald, > > PKG_PATH is deprecated since 6.1-RELEASE. > > Use /etc/installurl instead. > > https://man.openbsd.org/installurl > > > Freundliche Grüße / Regards > -stefan kapfhammer > Originalnachricht > Von: Donald Allen > Gesendet: Freitag, 5. Mai 2017 20:16 > An: OpenBSD general usage list > Betreff: Version skew? > > > I am running current on an amd64 system. I updated the system from the > latest (5/4) snapshot this morning, downloaded from the Alberta site. > But I am (still) unable to install the following package: > > doas /usr/sbin/pkg_add rust > quirks-2.319 signed on 2017-05-03T14:53:25Z > Can't install rust-1.16.0 because of libraries > |library c.89.5 not found > | /usr/lib/libc.so.89.3 (system): minor is too small > | /usr/lib/libc.so.89.4 (system): minor is too small > Direct dependencies for rust-1.16.0 resolve to gcc-libs-4.9.4p4 > Full dependency tree is gcc-libs-4.9.4p4 > > This is with > > PKG_PATH=https://ftp.OpenBSD.org/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/amd64 > > The /etc/doas.conf uses the KEEPENV option for /usr/sbin/pkg_add. > > What I am not clear about is why a package would require a library > with a greater minor version (and presumably newer) than that supplied > by the most recent snapshot? If someone could explain this I'd > appreciate it. > > /Don Allen >