Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] does emerge verify arch compatibility when merging a binary package?
Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: > E.G: would portage block an attempt to install a ppc binary on an amd64? I believe it checks the CHOST in the binpkg and compares it against the configured CHOST for the system. -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux DeveloperCatalyst/Genkernel + Release Engineering Lead
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Time to say goodbye
Marius Mauch wrote: So I guess that wraps it up. It's been a nice ride most of the time, but now it's time for me to leave the Gentoo train. Enjoy your escape. You'll be missed. -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux DeveloperCatalyst/Genkernel + Release Engineering Lead
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] How to extract the version/revision of an installed package?
Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: Given the following: # qlist -Iv sys-apps/portage sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.5 How do I safely extract the "2.1.4.5"? That's probably offtopic for this list, since it really has nothing to do with portage itself. However, you probably want something like: qlist -Iv sys-apps/portage | sed -e 's:^.*-\([0-9][^-_]*\).*$:\1:' -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux DeveloperCatalyst/Genkernel + Release Engineering Lead
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] How to extract the version/revision of an installed package?
Andrew Gaffney wrote: Amit Dor-Shifer wrote: Given the following: # qlist -Iv sys-apps/portage sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.5 How do I safely extract the "2.1.4.5"? That's probably offtopic for this list, since it really has nothing to do with portage itself. However, you probably want something like: qlist -Iv sys-apps/portage | sed -e 's:^.*-\([0-9][^-_]*\).*$:\1:' And if you want the full version (with RC position and revision): qlist -Iv sys-apps/portage | sed -e 's:^.*-\([0-9].*\)$:\1:' -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux DeveloperCatalyst/Genkernel + Release Engineering Lead
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-2.2-rc3 parallel merges quit being parallel
Duncan wrote: "--jobs=10 --keep-going --load-average=15" For a dual-dual-core setup, a load average of 4.0 is "fully loaded". Anything higher than that and you're just causing jobs to queue up unnecessarily and your system to "thrash". have MAKEOPTS="-j -l20" so it's not going to be low all the time). Same thing here. Also, why would you specify different --load-average values in these two places? -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Connecting source and binary packages.
Jason Cipriani wrote: I have mozilla-firefox-bin installed, but when I update things that depend on firefox (such as epiphany), they attempt to get mozilla-firefox instead. How do I make emerge realize that I already have the binaries installed and don't need the source distribution? This isn't a support forum. Please post this on the gentoo-user mailing list. -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator -- gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev]
Tony wrote: Hi, I am new, but I think I found a problem in thr portage tree, dealing with texlive and tetex. I have a personal overlay, where I changed the dependency in the ebuild from "dev-text/tetex" to "virtual/latex-base." This solved it for the package. I think that the packages will have to transition, because of these conflicts. Also, let me know if this is the right way to do this, and if it is, I suggest you do it soon. (It gets annoying) Don't post without a subject. That's really annoying. Also, this is completely off-topic for this list. Please file a bug at http://bugs.gentoo.org/ -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator -- gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] IUSE and userland_, elibc_, kernel_, etc.
Zac Medico wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Frysinger wrote:
userland_* and all other profile-expanded USE flags are "magical" and arent
available for user consumption. that is how i view IUSE. it was my
understanding that portage was going to get fixed to automatically include
the profile-expanded ones and so adding anything to IUSE now for ebuilds is
dumb when they're just going to get turned around and removed. the same goes
for all implicit/automatic USE expanding things. portage can do this for us,
so having developers track it themselves seems like a waste of time.
-mike
Fair enough, but we need to define a way to "automatically include
the profile-expanded ones" since none currently exists. One thing
that I don't like about using USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN is that ARCH isn't a
USE_EXPAND. It would have been more consistent if it had been,
along with KERNEL, ELIBC, and USERLAND.
Why not turn it into one? The whole USE="${ARCH}" thing is inconsistent with the
USE_EXPANDed KERNEL, ELIBC, AND USERLAND. Yes, I know that it's been around a
lot longer than the others, but that's not a good reason for keeping it the way
it is.
I don't think it would be a difficult transition. Is there any reason that
portage can't set both USE=${ARCH} *and* USE=arch_${ARCH} for a while (until all
ebuilds have been changed to use the new USE_EXPANDed form)? We could even just
have portage set both forms indefinitely (the old form does no harm if nothing
is using it).
--
Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] RFC: replacing "packages"
Marius Mauch wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:34:44 -0500
Andrew Gaffney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For packages that are in the "system" set, wouldn't adding the
contents of system.{,r}depend to {,R}DEPEND cause problems in dep
resolution? Would there be a way to prevent the contents of these
files from being added for packages that are themselves in these
files?
Did you miss the part about RESTRICT=system-deps?
I read it before, but didn't register it. Re-reading that sentence in the
context of my question, it makes more sense now :)
--
Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] RFC: replacing "packages"
Marius Mauch wrote:
As package sets are mostly done now, I'm starting to think about
something else. One of my pet peeves with portage is the "packages"
file in profiles, for several reasons:
1) it has two completely independent purposes
2) it implements a redundant visibility filter as package.mask is also
available in profiles
3) the syntax for defining the "system" set plain sucks
4) the name doesn't really say anything about the purpose
Another issue that isn't directly related, but covered by the proposed
solution below, is the so called "implicit system dependency" in
ebuilds, which doesn't really exist. It only an assumption by people
that the "system" set is satisfied before an ebuild is processed, so
its contents don't have to be listed in *DEPEND. If a user breaks that
assumption by not regulary ensuring that "system" is satisfied bugs can
occur. Another issue is the informal exception when system items are
allowed to/must be listed in *DEPEND, IMO that should be formalized.
To solve both issues I propose the following system:
Profiles can contain the files "system.depend" and "system.rdepend"
whose combined contents make up the "system" target. If any of those
two files exists the "packages" file is ignored. The syntax should
either be the same as package.mask or, if desired, also allow complex
atoms (use-conditionals, any-of constructs).
The second part would be that portage implicitly adds the content of
the files to the DEPEND or RDEPEND setting of each ebuild unless it
contains RESTRICT=system-deps. Obviously this would have to be tied to
a new EAPI version. (an undefined cornercase here is if a profile does
not contain the new files, not sure how that should be handled)
Benefits:
- we get rid of all the issues outlined at the top
- should make it easier long-term to setup a no-compile system that only
installs binary packages due to separation of build- and runtime deps
in "system"
Problems:
- obviously it has to be implemented first
- no obvious solution for stacking rules (e.g. child uses system.*, but
parent profile only has "packages")
- some people might rely on the "packages" file
So, comments?
I like the idea overall. I dislike the "packages" file for many of the same
reasons that you pointed out. However, I have a few questions/concerns with your
proposal.
For packages that are in the "system" set, wouldn't adding the contents of
system.{,r}depend to {,R}DEPEND cause problems in dep resolution? Would there be
a way to prevent the contents of these files from being added for packages that
are themselves in these files?
How is the "system" set constructed from these files? Would they simply be
concatenated (minus duplicates) and treated like the old "packages" file (minus
the magic visibility filtering)?
--
Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] localization.py
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: 2007-10-19 17:41:06 Andrew Gaffney napisał(a): Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: Does localization.py exist for a reason? I don't see a localization.py. So you have old Portage. I wouldn't consider 2.1.3.14 old. There is a portage_localization.py, and it's used by portage.py and portage_locks.py. But it could be used by almost all Portage Python modules. Feel free to submit a patch. -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] localization.py
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: Does localization.py exist for a reason? I don't see a localization.py. There is a portage_localization.py, and it's used by portage.py and portage_locks.py. -- Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage.exception.OperationNotPermitted: chown('/var/lib/gentoo/news/news-gentoo.skip', 0, 250)
Please file a bug for this if one doesn't exist already.
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote:
$ emerge -p portage
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild R ] sys-apps/portage-
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/emerge", line 18, in
retval = _emerge.emerge_main()
File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/_emerge/__init__.py", line 6783, in emerge_main
display_news_notification(trees)
File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/_emerge/__init__.py", line 4613, in
display_news_notification
portdb, vardb, NEWS_PATH, UNREAD_PATH, repo)
File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/_emerge/__init__.py", line 4781, in
checkUpdatedNewsItems
return manager.getUnreadItems( repo_id, update=True )
File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage/news.py", line 115, in getUnreadItems
self.updateItems(repoid)
File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage/news.py", line 104, in updateItems
uid=int(self.config["PORTAGE_INST_UID"]), gid=portage_gid, mode=0664)
File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage/util.py", line 594, in apply_permissions
raise OperationNotPermitted(func_call)
portage.exception.OperationNotPermitted:
chown('/var/lib/gentoo/news/news-gentoo.skip', 0, 250)
$
It has happened since r8148.
This bug isn't reproducible when `emerge` is invoked by root.
--
Andrew Gaffney http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer Catalyst/Installer + x86 release coordinator
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Improvement suggestion for emerge: Not using a new connection for every file
Beginner wrote: Hi, I recommend not to use wget and not to reconnect to the server for every single packet, but to hold the connection therefore spare traffic and download more fast. Uhh, what exactly are you talking about? There is very little overhead to reconnecting to a server to download a second file. Also, how often are multiple files downloaded from the same server? Probably not very often. I've heard of people trying to rice their binaries, but ricing your downloads? :P -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] mysql workbench - bug #131383
Anthony Ettinger wrote: I get the following error when trying to compile mysql workbench from the bugzilla ebuilds. /usr/include/sigc++-2.0/sigc++/adaptors/bound_argument.h:158: error: 'const class sigc::bound_argument >&>' has no member named 'visit' It's something I've needed for awhile, and there are a few other users in the thread. ebuild: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=131383 forum topic: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=3564653#3564653 Would you care to explain what exactly this has to do with portage development? -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] use.force and package.use.force (bug #142853)
Brian Harring wrote: On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 01:13:34PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: Brian Harring wrote: Semantics of USE=-gtk not working on a package that has gtk forced doesn't sound all that nice btw; Which is why the flag shouldn't be forced unless it's almost certain that the flag shouldn't be disabled. The gtk flag might not ever fall into that category, but something like cxx might (nocxx inverted). Flag shouldn't be forced, period imo. I could not agree with this more. I've been watching this whole thread wondering when certain people were gonna see how dumb this idea actually is (no offense...I've backed my fair share of dumb ideas). It's a crappy alternative for Alec's IUSE defaults. I know there will be cases where someone will want to force a flag on for one (or more) package but there will be other packages that forcing the same flag on is undesireable. Unless use.force can be done per-package, it will always be a very crappy alternative to IUSE defaults. Even then, it should still *act* like IUSE defaults (stuck somewhere in the USE stacking order and "easily" overridden). -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] has_version and built_with_use ignore package.provided
Edward Catmur wrote: If the package is installed through package.provided, then I agree with the *current* Portage behaviour of assuming that all USE flags are on. Ya can't blame me for that. It's currently the only sensible choice. (Funnily enough, no-one has suggested dying as an option for this). I would. Pending a proper resolution (USE data in package.provided), users can set USE in vdb. First, having users poke around in vdb is a very bad idea. Doing the wrong thing in there can cause all kinds of weird b0rkage. Second, does portage even consult vdb for a package in package.provided? package.provided was created to *replace* the act of creating a dummy vdb entry (I think that's how it was done, anyway) to fool portage into thinking a package was installed. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] has_version and built_with_use ignore package.provided
Paul Bredbury wrote: ive changed built_with_use to call 'die' if it is unable to locate the USE file (aka the package is not installed) -mike If the package is not installed (taking into consideration package.provided also), then built_with_use should return *False*. How can a package be built_with_use anything if it's not installed? You're saying that in this situation the answer is "unknown". I'm saying that it's logically impossible for the answer to be True, therefore the answer is False. There is no third option, because it's a Boolean function. Tell that to python. When you call a function that only returns True or False, it's also possible for it to raise an Exception. This is pretty close to what 'die' does. If an ebuild is calling built_with_use on a package that isn't installed, something is very wrong. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage.py splitout
Chris White wrote: While doing some documenting on what functions needed to be documented for the API documentation project, I found that portage.py seems to be quite a "dumping ground" for functions: http://www.gen2net.net/portage-doc/portage.py I think it would be nice to split some of the classes out ( yah yah, I'll make patches ;( ). If someone has already mentioned this, feel free to beat me solid with the cluebat ;). There have been many attempts to do this, but somehow they've never quite made it into portage. I remember antarus doing this around a year ago, before he became a dev. I also remember someone submitting a patch on this list a month or so ago that did something similar. Everyone knows it's a mess, but nobody wants to actually fix it :) Oh, and consider yourself Clue-By-Four'd :P -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 'emerge' request: make --tree not imply --pretend
Dan Corson wrote: I am sorry, you are indeed correct. What I should have requested is: a way to have the package list output in non-interactive, package-installing (that is, not --pretend) execution. It may be that --pretend is a little over-loaded currently. (I was confused, at any rate, as you can see.) Thanks, --Dan Your request still makes absolutely no sense. What's wrong with running 'emerge -uDpvt world && emerge -uDv world'? Why do you say --pretend is "overloaded"? It only does *one* thing...list packages. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] 'emerge' request: make --tree not imply --pretend
Dan Corson wrote: Even when I am running 'emerge' non-interactively, I like to have the dependency record afforded by --tree. Currently when updating my system non-interactively to get this I have to do: (emerge -uDtv world; emerge -uDv world) &> logfile because --tree implies --pretend. Could this implication be dropped? Thanks, --Dan P.S. If this is a reasonable request, it might be reasonable for the other options that imply --pretend that I don't use, namely --changelog and --columns. P.P.S. Even echo y | emerge -auDtv world doesn't work because --ask wants a terminal. Your request doesn't even make sense. AFAIK, the *only* thing --tree affects is the output of the package list as part of --pretend (and --ask). If --tree didn't imply --pretend, 'emerge -uDtv world' would give you the exact same output as 'emerge -uDv world'. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] GWN -portage-2.1 announcement.
Brian wrote: Did I understand it wrong or did they get this mixed up in the GWN announcement: /etc/portage/package.unmask/kde, /etc/portage/package.unmask/xorg Shouldn't it be: /etc/portage/kde/package.*, /etc/portage/xorg/package.* You understood it wrong. /etc/portage/package.unmask/foo is correct. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] kudoos to all
Zac Medico wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jason Stubbs wrote: Most of that work can be attributed to Brian Harring. For a real kicker though, throw "portdbapi.auxdbmodule = cache.metadata_overlay.database" into /etc/portage/modules and FEATURES="-metadata-transfer" into make.conf. Then rm -rf /var/cache/edb/dep. This one goes to Zac Medico, the current release coordinator, and builds on Brian's work to cut out cache updating altogether. New in pre6 and in need of testing - especially when local modifications are made - but very promising. Before I switched from rsync to cvs I used metadata_overlay all of the time. Andrew Gaffney has also reported good results with this module. He share's the portage tree (including pre-generated rsync cache) via nfs and uses metadata_overlay on all the clients so that they pull pre-generated cache on demand. Yep, still going strong through _pre6-r3 on multiple arches. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] --nospinner in emerge_default_opts
William Hubbs wrote: I just ran a test with this again, and it does look like "--nospinner" is not allowed in emerge_default_opts. If this should be filed as a bug, let me know, or if it isn't a bug, would it be possible to allow this option? Is there a reason you can't just alias it? -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] rsync metadata cache patch (obsoletes metadata transfer on sync)
Zac Medico wrote:
I have reimplemented the previous patch as a normal cache module that adds a
writable layer on top of the pre-generated metadata. If you'd like to try this
out (with portage-2.1_preX), simply copy metadata_overlay.py into
/usr/lib/portage/pym/cache/ and add portdbapi.auxdbmodule =
cache.metadata_overlay.database to /etc/portage/modules.
I haven't tested this much, but like the previous patch, this shouldn't cause
any harm. Feedback would be appreciated.
Portage didn't explode and dep calculation is pretty damn quick with an empty
/var/cache/edb/dep/, so I assume that it's working properly. Is it normal for
/var/cache/edb/dep/${PORTDIR}/ to be re-created (it's still empty) when this new
module is in use?
--
Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project
--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] rsync metadata cache patch (obsoletes metadata transfer on sync)
Zac Medico wrote: I was playing with the metadata cache stuff this weekend and decided to write a patch that obsoletes metadata transfers on sync. Simply apply this patch to portage-2.1_preX and add "metadb" to FEATURES in make.conf. Side note: this feature should resolve bug 90518. May I have the honor of bearing your children? Seriously, this is nice. Why hasn't this been done before? I'm nowhere near an expert on the portage internals, but this looks like it was pretty "easy". -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] quick questions about portage
Ricardo Loureiro wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, I'm the guy trying to put the portage tree in a relational database and making a portage-lite script to search and caculate deps from the database. I have currently some questions I couldn't find looking at the huge portage.py file: - - Where does portage saves information about installed files besides the world file, like versions installed and such? /var/db/pkg/ - - I came across some dependancies like "useflag? ( || ( cat/package ) )". I can't find a logic in this and assume it's a mistake, or am I missing something? "|| ( cat/pkga cat/pkgb )" means that either pkga or pkgb will satisfy the dependency. - - What exactly are CDEPEND, PDEPEND and EAPI specified on the cache format? I don't think CDEPEND is used anymore. PDEPEND is post-depend...packages that should be installed *after* the current one is emerged. I'm not sure about EAPI. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Help needed while installing KDE for gentoo
Rajat Gujral wrote: Hi , I have downloaded image (Kernel-2.6.12-gentoo-r6) for x86 architecture from the gentoo website and complied the gentoo kernel for pentium 3 processor (coppermine). But while emering portages for gentoo, after compilation of KDE portage my computer hangs permanentally and nothing more is done after that. Everytime when i restart my computer and emerge KDE, it starts compilation from the same point . Also i keep getting DMA_INTR errors sometimes while installion . I have tried using -c option with mke2fs but the errors still keep coming . Is it because of that . Can anyone please help me and suggest what would be causing this problem and how can i carry on with the installation. I was facing some compiler problem (i368 VS i686 ) which then was resolved by using fix_lib_tools . Is there something that i maybe missing as this is the first time i am installing gentoo. This isn't even close to the correct mailing list for this. You should try the gentoo-user mailing list. Also, it sounds like you're having hardware issues. -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
