Hi, Am Montag, 3. Mai 2021, 19:46:22 CEST schrieb Hauke Mehrtens: > On 5/3/21 2:38 PM, Baptiste Jonglez wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 02-05-21, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > >> When a package is not installed because it has unresolved dependencies > >> > >> normally we get only an error message like this: > >> * pkg_hash_fetch_best_installation_candidate: Packages for ltq-vdsl-app > >> found, but incompatible with the architectures configured * > >> opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package ltq-vdsl-app. > >> > >> Log in addition the following error message: > >> * pkg_hash_check_unresolved: can not find dependency ltq-dsl-base for > >> ltq-vdsl-app> > > Since the error has probably nothing to do with "architectures", wouldn't > > it make more sense to remove or improve the first error message? Or > > understand why it fails for seemingly unrelated reasons. > > This "incompatible with the architectures configured" error message is > shown for more error cases than the newly added one, see here: > https://lxr.openwrt.org/source/opkg-lede/libopkg/pkg_hash.c#L395 > > It would probably be good to improve the error messages, but I do not > understand the full code. If someone has some suggestions on how to > improve this it would be nice. >
Hauke mentioined this patch in relation to FS#3814. I build a patched version myself and gave it a test - It fixes the problem Having no packagelist avail an trying to install luci-proto-ipip results in a message pointing towards the missing dependent package ~# opkg install /tmp/luci-proto-ipip_git-19.307.61018-284918b_all.ipk Unknown package 'luci-proto-ipip'. Collected errors: * pkg_hash_check_unresolved: can not find dependency ipip for luci-proto-ipip * pkg_hash_fetch_best_installation_candidate: Packages for luci-proto-ipip found, but incompatible with the architectures configured * opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package luci-proto-ipip. The "Unknown package 'luci-proto-ipip'." line is still incorrect, but "can not find dependency ipip" is the key. So maybe not the last change to the code, but a big improvement. Sven > >> Signed-off-by: Hauke Mehrtens <ha...@hauke-m.de> > >> --- > >> > >> I am not sure if this would happen in normal cases too and spam the > >> error log, I only saw this in an error case. > >> > >> libopkg/pkg_hash.c | 4 +++- > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/libopkg/pkg_hash.c b/libopkg/pkg_hash.c > >> index a07a25e..6c04ab2 100644 > >> --- a/libopkg/pkg_hash.c > >> +++ b/libopkg/pkg_hash.c > >> @@ -263,8 +263,10 @@ pkg_hash_check_unresolved(pkg_t *maybe) > >> > >> if (unresolved) { > >> > >> res = 1; > >> tmp = unresolved; > >> > >> - while (*tmp) > >> + while (*tmp) { > >> + opkg_msg(ERROR, "can not find dependency %s for %s\n", > >> *tmp, > >> maybe->name);>> > >> free(*(tmp++)); > >> > >> + } > >> > >> free(unresolved); > >> > >> } > >> pkg_vec_free(depends); _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel