On 30-03-15 21:16, Alejandro del Castillo wrote:
Sounds like you hit an already reported bug:
https://code.google.com/p/opkg/issues/detail?id=142
It is currently targeted for the 0.3 release, but I am not sure if Paul is
going to be able to get to it on the 0.3 timeframe. Could you add details
to the bug report (how to reproduce steps would be great)? If Paul doesn't
get to it on the 0.3 timeframe, I'll take care of it on the next release.
It looks a lot like the problem described there, so I think it's a safe bet to
say that they're one and the same.
As for steps to reproduce, well, it does that for some packages but not for
others, and I haven't been able to figure out what triggers it. The common
factor appears to be that it usually concerns libraries, i.e. packages that
the user didn't select but where there because of dependencies. If I find a
way to trigger it, i'll add that to the bug description.
Kind regards,
Mike.
cheers,
-Alejandro
From: Mike Looijmans <[email protected]>
To: Alejandro del Castillo <[email protected]>,
Cc: [email protected],
[email protected]
Date: 03/28/2015 08:04 AM
Subject: Re: [OE-core] Not selecting <old version of package> as
installing it would break existing dependencies
On 27-03-15 22:21, Alejandro del Castillo wrote:
[email protected] wrote on 03/24/2015
12:16:05 PM:
From: Mike Looijmans <[email protected]>
To: [email protected],
Date: 03/24/2015 12:16 PM
Subject: [OE-core] Not selecting <old version of package> as
installing it would break existing dependencies
Sent by: [email protected]
After upgrading a library to a newer version, for example, something
called libdvbsi++ from 0.3.6 to 0.3.7, running opkg upgrade outputs the
following cryptic error message:
Not selecting libdvbsi++1 0.3.6 as installing it would break existing
dependencies.
When opkg runs, it creates a list of all the available packages on the
configured repos + all the installed packages. During an upgrade, it
goes
through the process of finding the best upgrade match for each installed
package, searching on the master list. The process goes through a series
of checks for each candidate, like making sure the archs are compatible,
and making sure installing a candidate won't break existing installed
packages. In your case, opkg determines there are 2 candidates,
libdvbsi++0.3.6 and libdvbsi++0.3.7. While evaluating libdvbsi++0.3.6,
the
pkg_breaks_reverse_dep check fails, triggering the message shown above
(and removing the candidate).
Adding "-V2" to opkg upgrade expands that with the following message:
opkg_prepare_upgrade_pkg: Package libdvbsi++1 (0.3.7-r2.0) installed in
root is up to date.
So apparently it knows about the later version, so why complain about
the old one?
The function that returns the best candidate match correctly returns
libdvbsi++1 0.3.7. It then compares it against what's already installed.
The DEBUG message above shows that the best candidate found is already
installed on the system.
There is only one package that (r)depends on that lib (enigma2).
Nothing
else needs it.
This often happens with other packages as well. Is this a bug in opkg,
or is it trying to tell us we're doing something wrong?
It is not a bug, the message is harmless as it is only pointing to the
reason why one of the possible upgrade candidates was discarded.
But why does this message keep coming back, even months after the
upgrade that installed 0.3.7?
The 0.3.6 version is no longer installed, it is no longer in the feeds,
but opkg still keeps whining about it. A bit of searching in the
filesystem of the box reveals that it is only named in a file named
"/var/lib/opkg/status", which contains the following lines:
Package: libdvbsi++1
Version: 0.3.7-r2.0
Depends: libgcc1 (>= 4.9.1), libstdc++6 (>= 4.9.1), libc6 (>= 2.20)
Provides: libdvbsi++
Status: unknown ok installed
Architecture: mips32el
Installed-Time: 1427216569
Auto-Installed: yes
Package: libdvbsi++1
Version: 0.3.6-r1.2
Depends: libgcc1 (>= 4.9.1), libstdc++6 (>= 4.9.1), libc6 (>= 2.20)
Provides: libdvbsi++
Status: install ok not-installed
Architecture: mips32el
Installed-Time: 1423323784
Auto-Installed: yes
As you can see, 0.3.6 is mentioned here as "not-installed", but opkg
keeps reporting about it. Removing the entry from the file works around
the problem, but I would have expected opkg to remove the entry after
upgrading it. Why didn't opkg remove the obsolete entry?
Hope this helps!
It helps to know that the message is harmless.
Kind regards,
Mike Looijmans
System Expert
TOPIC Embedded Products
Eindhovenseweg 32-C, NL-5683 KH Best
Postbus 440, NL-5680 AK Best
Telefoon: +31 (0) 499 33 69 79
Telefax: +31 (0) 499 33 69 70
E-mail: [email protected]
Website: www.topicproducts.com
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
--
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
