Re: [gentoo-user] Rebuilding all dependants of a package

[Alan McKinnon]

hehehehe :-)

every now and again I unleash my inner grumpy old fart and should him to
the world at large!

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Neil Bothwick  wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 17:05:03 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you should lay out clearly why you think you need to do this,
> > so everyone else can help match your expectations to reality :-)
>
> Watch out everyone, Alan's in one of those moods! ;-)
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick
>
> C: (n.) the language following A and B. The world still awaits D and
>E. By Z, it may be acceptable for general use.
>



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion

[allan gottlieb]

On Mon, Feb 19 2018, Neil Bothwick wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:05:37 -0700, the...@sys-concept.com wrote:
>
>> It is a good point. Why Gentoo developers marked or allow to mark
>> gnucash-2.7 branch stable in portage when the developers
>> https://www.gnucash.org/download.phtml did not mark it STABLE
>
> The key phrase there is "stable in portage". Not whether it is suitable
> or not for any particular use. If the ebuild is considered stable, it
> should be marked as such.

Those interested in the status of gnucash-2.7 should follow bug 647112.
In particular if there is a reply to comment 6.

allan

Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion

[Neil Bothwick]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:05:37 -0700, the...@sys-concept.com wrote:

> It is a good point. Why Gentoo developers marked or allow to mark
> gnucash-2.7 branch stable in portage when the developers
> https://www.gnucash.org/download.phtml did not mark it STABLE

The key phrase there is "stable in portage". Not whether it is suitable
or not for any particular use. If the ebuild is considered stable, it
should be marked as such.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

furbling, v.:
Having to wander through a maze of ropes at an airport or bank
even when you are the only person in line.
-- Rich Hall, "Sniglets"


pgpCEnVMfnuAq.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion

[thelma]

On 02/18/2018 05:50 PM, John Blinka wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:40 AM allan gottlieb  wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, Feb 18 2018, Mick wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, 18 February 2018 01:09:36 GMT allan gottlieb wrote:
>>
>> Specifically excluding the buggy (old) version of webkit-gtk,
>> portage wants me to merge a newish (testing) version of gnucash that
>> uses a solid new version of webkit-gtk.  I have the new version of
>> webkit-gtk, but really want to delay installing the testing gnucash.
> 
> 
> Looks like gnucash-2.7.4-r1 is now in the stable branch of portage despite
> gnucash declaring “This release is UNSTABLE and SHOULD NOT BE USED in
> production” (their caps, not mine).  I’ve masked it and reverted to
> icu58.2-r1 by masking icu-60.2.  The older icu allows
> webkit-gtk-2.4.11-r200 to build, and gives me a version of gnucash which
> I’ve used for a long time and trust.  Not going to upgrade irreversibly to
> a version which the authors themselves don’t trust.  My 2 cents.
> 
> John

It is a good point. Why Gentoo developers marked or allow to mark
gnucash-2.7 branch stable in portage when the developers
https://www.gnucash.org/download.phtml did not mark it STABLE

It seems to me one of Gentoo developer is trying to use us a guinea pigs
and the UNSTABLE "gnucash-2.7" on us.

--
Thelma.

Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 18 February 2018 02:14:18 GMT Neil Bothwick wrote:

> I no longer use Gnucash, having switched to KMyMoney a few years ago. Now
> that's just jumped a major version and I had to mask it because of
> missing features... so much for progress.

This conversation reminds me that I used to like Quicken on That Other 
Platform. Does anyone know of a broad equivalent to it on Linux? I don't 
relish having to learn double-entry book-keeping.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] detox'ing files by keeping their time stamp?

[karl]

Stroller:
> > On 18 Feb 2018, at 17:47, Floyd Anderson  wrote:
> >> 
> >> $ cat t.sh
> >> #!/bin/bash
> >> TMPF=$(mktemp "/tmp/detox_wrapper.$$.")
> >> for f in "$@"; do
> >>   touch -r "$f" "$TMPF"
> >>   detox "$f"
> >>   touch -r "$TMPF" "$f"
> >> done
> >> rm -f "$TMPF"
> > 
> > If I’m not totally wrong, the second `touch` cannot work because the file 
> > that "$f" holds is renamed now. That’s what I mean earlier with iterating a 
> > list or adapt Stroller’s suggestion.
> 
> How careless of me.
> 
> A solution is to use `detox -v` and capture the output.
> 
>$ touch '1234[]'
>$ ls '1234[]'
>1234[]
>$ detox -v 1234*
>Scanning: 1234[]
>1234[] -> 1234-
>$
> 
> A bit untidy. Really, detox should be patched to check the date and apply it 
> to the new file.

I must be missing something, but why don't you use plain old mv, it 
doen't change the times as long you stay in the same file system:

$ stat br.log | grep 201
Access: 2018-02-07 22:59:51.746741788 +0100
Modify: 2016-08-16 15:34:40.742454976 +0200
Change: 2018-02-07 12:30:09.737085062 +0100
$ mv br.log z.log | grep 201
$ stat z.log 
Access: 2018-02-07 22:59:51.746741788 +0100
Modify: 2016-08-16 15:34:40.742454976 +0200
Change: 2018-02-19 16:24:35.662712287 +0100


And regarding detox -v, why not use tr

ls -1 |
while read a
do
 b=`echo "$a" | tr '[]' '-'` # or whatever mapping you want
 mv "$a" "$b"
done

Regards,
/Karl Hammar

---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94 Östhammar
Sweden
+46 173 140 57

Re: [gentoo-user] Rebuilding all dependants of a package

[Neil Bothwick]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 17:05:03 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> Perhaps you should lay out clearly why you think you need to do this,
> so everyone else can help match your expectations to reality :-)

Watch out everyone, Alan's in one of those moods! ;-)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

C: (n.) the language following A and B. The world still awaits D and
   E. By Z, it may be acceptable for general use.


pgpYsEapygQLv.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Rebuilding all dependants of a package

[Alan McKinnon]

On 19/02/2018 14:55, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:

Hey,

I'm not exactly new to portage, but one thing that I cannot seem to figure
out is how to rebuild all dependants of a package. Not *dependencies*,
dependants: packages that require said package.

As a recent example: whenever go (the language) is updated to a new version
(say from 1.9 to 1.10, as it happended recently), I'd like to rebuild docker
& friends - or more specifically 'things that are compiled with go'.

The --changed-deps option doesn't seem to do the trick, so instead I manually
do a -vp --depclean on go and manually --oneshot all installed packages that
have their hands on it. This is obviously stupid and error-prone.

Am I missing something or is this really not easily possible?
Basically I'm looking for a hard --oneshot --revdep-rebuild with a package
argument.



There isn't really a one-shot way to do this easily. Ebuilds do not 
contain dependants, they contain dependencies and that is a one-way 
arrow. So you end up having to walk the tree to get the information you 
are after.


If you have to do it, your example will suffice. Crude, but works.

I have to question though why you think you need to do this. If you want 
to do it ad-hoc without needing a good reason, then do the above. If you 
think that stuff must be rebuilt when go is bumped, then you are not 
correct. ebuilds have sub-slot dependencies which you can think of as 
somewhat like ABI/API version tracking, not package tracking. If go is 
rebuilt and the ABI/API changes, emerge notices and rebuilds packages 
that were using the old go. If a go-using package is compatible with the 
chnage, it is not rebuilt because it does not need to be rebuilt and the 
runtime linker deals with what happens at runtime. If portage misses 
something in this, that is a bug and the ebuild needs updating.


Perhaps you should lay out clearly why you think you need to do this, so 
everyone else can help match your expectations to reality :-)



--
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Rebuilding all dependants of a package

[Branko Grubic]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:55:08 + (UTC)
Holger Hoffstätte  wrote:

> Hey,
> 
> I'm not exactly new to portage, but one thing that I cannot seem to
> figure out is how to rebuild all dependants of a package. Not
> *dependencies*, dependants: packages that require said package.
> 
> As a recent example: whenever go (the language) is updated to a new
> version (say from 1.9 to 1.10, as it happended recently), I'd like to
> rebuild docker & friends - or more specifically 'things that are
> compiled with go'.
> 
> The --changed-deps option doesn't seem to do the trick, so instead I
> manually do a -vp --depclean on go and manually --oneshot all
> installed packages that have their hands on it. This is obviously
> stupid and error-prone.
> 
> Am I missing something or is this really not easily possible?
> Basically I'm looking for a hard --oneshot --revdep-rebuild with a
> package argument.
> 
> thanks,
> Holger
> 
> 

I never needed this, so I don't know how to do it directly with emerge
(is it possible?), but you can use equery like this to get a list:

equery -q d dev-lang/go

-q/--quiet (minimal output)
(d)epends (list all packages directly depending on ATOM)

to get a list of packages installed which depend on dev-lang/go
you can filter versions out of it and feed that to 'emerge -av1'.

Or if you trust this ugly one-liner without filtering (probably ugliest
thing, but seems to do the job):

emerge -av1 $(for i in $(equery -q d sys-apps/util-linux); do echo
"=$i"; done)

[gentoo-user] Rebuilding all dependants of a package

[Holger Hoffstätte]

Hey,

I'm not exactly new to portage, but one thing that I cannot seem to figure
out is how to rebuild all dependants of a package. Not *dependencies*,
dependants: packages that require said package.

As a recent example: whenever go (the language) is updated to a new version
(say from 1.9 to 1.10, as it happended recently), I'd like to rebuild docker
& friends - or more specifically 'things that are compiled with go'.

The --changed-deps option doesn't seem to do the trick, so instead I manually
do a -vp --depclean on go and manually --oneshot all installed packages that
have their hands on it. This is obviously stupid and error-prone.

Am I missing something or is this really not easily possible?
Basically I'm looking for a hard --oneshot --revdep-rebuild with a package
argument.

thanks,
Holger

Re: [gentoo-user] detox'ing files by keeping their time stamp?

[Stroller]

> On 18 Feb 2018, at 11:38, Stroller  wrote:
>> 
>> With the tool 'detox' those filenames could be fixed.
>> 
>> But detox changes the time stamp of the files, which 
>> filenames are altered (not all files, which are examined).
>> 
>> Is there a way to either get detox not to alter the time stamp 
> 
> …
> It should be trivial to patch detox to do this itself.


BTW: `ebuild /usr/portage/app-misc/detox/detox-1.2.0-r3.ebuild unpack`

The function parse_file in file.c seems to be what does the work.

Use the utime systemcall? https://linux.die.net/man/2/utime

Stroller.

Re: [gentoo-user] Boot Gentoo live iso from grub

[Neil Bothwick]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 07:10:03 +0200, zless wrote:

> On top of that my nvme disk is not seen in the busybox recovery shell 
> in order to try to manually mount the encrypted container.
> I think the nvme things are modules inside the initrd and 
> that doesn't get loaded.

If you're in busybox the initramfs must have been loaded. Are the modules
you need in there? With dracut you can use lsinitrd to check the
contents. If so, maybe you need to modprobe them.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"There are some ideas so idiotic that only an intellectual could believe
them" George Orwell


pgpXCPpi1O2MV.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] detox'ing files by keeping their time stamp?

[Stroller]

> On 18 Feb 2018, at 17:47, Floyd Anderson  wrote:
>> 
>> $ cat t.sh
>> #!/bin/bash
>> TMPF=$(mktemp "/tmp/detox_wrapper.$$.")
>> for f in "$@"; do
>>   touch -r "$f" "$TMPF"
>>   detox "$f"
>>   touch -r "$TMPF" "$f"
>> done
>> rm -f "$TMPF"
> 
> If I’m not totally wrong, the second `touch` cannot work because the file 
> that "$f" holds is renamed now. That’s what I mean earlier with iterating a 
> list or adapt Stroller’s suggestion.

How careless of me.

A solution is to use `detox -v` and capture the output.

   $ touch '1234[]'
   $ ls '1234[]'
   1234[]
   $ detox -v 1234*
   Scanning: 1234[]
   1234[] -> 1234-
   $

A bit untidy. Really, detox should be patched to check the date and apply it to 
the new file.

Stroller.