Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
Peter Humphrey wrote: On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 07:18:11 Dale wrote: Peter Humphrey wrote: Is it working for you, Dale? :-) So far, so good. I been using unstable, except for the version, for quite a while. Are you saying something is broke and it works for me?? O_O Seriously?? This is a joke right?? No joke, I assure you. As Markos pointed out, a bug has already been opened, and I fell over it with a vanilla make.conf. Unless someone knows of a work-around, I'll stick with the old version of portage until the bug-fix reaches the stable system. So it is broke but works here for me? I'll get back up after I get my color back. I think I'm turning blue. O_O LOL Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 16:44:36 David W Noon wrote: I did the following: chown -R portage:portage /usr/portage /var/lib/portage /usr/local/portage and that fixed things. This assumes you use a userid of portage in a group named portage to maintain your system. Nope, that didn't do it either. I'll revert to root:portage for /var/lib/portage and root:root for /usr/local/portage, as they were, and wait for the official fix. Thanks anyway. -- Regards, Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On 2013-09-10 10:13 AM, Peter Humphrey pe...@humphrey.ukfsn.org wrote: On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 07:18:11 Dale wrote: Peter Humphrey wrote: Is it working for you, Dale? :-) So far, so good. I been using unstable, except for the version, for quite a while. Are you saying something is broke and it works for me?? O_O Seriously?? This is a joke right?? No joke, I assure you. As Markos pointed out, a bug has already been opened, and I fell over it with a vanilla make.conf. Unless someone knows of a work-around, I'll stick with the old version of portage until the bug-fix reaches the stable system. Well, according to that bug, the fix is IN 2.2.1 (well, it says the fix is in 2.1.13 and 2.2.0_alpha189, which means it is (should be?) in 2.2.1... So it can't be this bug?
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Wednesday 11 Sep 2013 07:14:30 Tanstaafl wrote: Well, according to that bug, the fix is IN 2.2.1 (well, it says the fix is in 2.1.13 and 2.2.0_alpha189, which means it is (should be?) in 2.2.1... So it can't be this bug? Whether that's true or not, I've found the problem. It was my own fault (so, what else is new?) I have a separate partition for /var/tmp and I'd forgotten to set the permissions. I don't know why it ever worked before. It should be fine now that I've set perms 1777. Sorry to cause you palpitations, Dale. Portage wasn't at fault - I was! -- Regards, Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
Peter Humphrey wrote: Sorry to cause you palpitations, Dale. Portage wasn't at fault - I was! Well, as some know, I'm disabled. Right now, my brother is fighting cancer. My 80 year old Mom is having issues, took her to the ER the other day and plan to take her to the regular Dr tomorrow. Then I add in local friends that are always coming up with something. Today I had to go fix a busted water pipe for a friend. I'm a bit frazzled which is why I haven't been posting much the past few weeks. All things considered, this is a VERY mild hiccup. I'm just glad you got it sorted out and it is working. Oh, I still try to be funny when I can and put my smiley face on too. See below. Dale :-) :-) ^-- Yep, still grinning. -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Monday 09 Sep 2013 09:44:01 Tanstaafl wrote: Wow... just noticed an update is available which, for me, means it has been stabilized (at least on amd64)... ---8 Now to wait a few days to see if there is any breakage to report (not worried about it really, though, since it has actually gotten a ton of testing over the last year or two)... ...and the first time I use it it falls over! Portage was the only thing updated yesterday, so nothing else changed at the same time. # emerge --sync Synchronization of repository 'gentoo' located in '/usr/portage'... Starting rsync with rsync://192.168.2.2/gentoo-portage... Checking server timestamp ... receiving incremental file list rsync: mkstemp /var/tmp/.tmp8KJSYc.AHSsPH failed: Permission denied (13) I checked it wasn't anything I'd set in make.conf by stripping out everything but the original few lines from system installation, so I'm sure I hadn't set any odd paths. So for the moment I've masked out =sys-apps/portage-2.2.1 and reverted to 2.1.12.2. Now I'm getting some odd USE flag conflicts, which I suppose won't be related; I'll work on sorting that out. I also tried syncing a 32-bit chroot Gentoo system and that worked fine. That system has always had: # grep portage /etc/portage/package.keywords sys-apps/portage- ** Trust someone to find a problem! :-( Is it working for you, Dale? :-) -- Regards, Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On 10 September 2013 10:13, Peter Humphrey pe...@humphrey.ukfsn.org wrote: On Monday 09 Sep 2013 09:44:01 Tanstaafl wrote: Wow... just noticed an update is available which, for me, means it has been stabilized (at least on amd64)... ---8 Now to wait a few days to see if there is any breakage to report (not worried about it really, though, since it has actually gotten a ton of testing over the last year or two)... ...and the first time I use it it falls over! Portage was the only thing updated yesterday, so nothing else changed at the same time. # emerge --sync Synchronization of repository 'gentoo' located in '/usr/portage'... Starting rsync with rsync://192.168.2.2/gentoo-portage... Checking server timestamp ... receiving incremental file list rsync: mkstemp /var/tmp/.tmp8KJSYc.AHSsPH failed: Permission denied (13) Maybe this http://bugs.gentoo.org/477682 -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
Peter Humphrey wrote: Is it working for you, Dale? :-) [IP-] [ ] sys-apps/portage-2.2.1:0 Sun Aug 25 05:27:12 2013 sys-apps/portage-2.2.1 So far, so good. I been using unstable, except for the version, for quite a while. Are you saying something is broke and it works for me?? O_O Seriously?? This is a joke right?? Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 07:18:11 Dale wrote: Peter Humphrey wrote: Is it working for you, Dale? :-) So far, so good. I been using unstable, except for the version, for quite a while. Are you saying something is broke and it works for me?? O_O Seriously?? This is a joke right?? No joke, I assure you. As Markos pointed out, a bug has already been opened, and I fell over it with a vanilla make.conf. Unless someone knows of a work-around, I'll stick with the old version of portage until the bug-fix reaches the stable system. -- Regards, Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 16:48:24 Hinnerk van Bruinehsen wrote: Try [adding] -userpriv to your FEATURES (as in FEATURES=-userpriv) in make.conf Nope. Didn't help. I see mention of usersync in the bug conversation, but I don't know what that means. I'll just wait for the fixed version, I think. -- Regards, Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 03:13:50PM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote: On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 07:18:11 Dale wrote: Peter Humphrey wrote: Is it working for you, Dale? :-) So far, so good. I been using unstable, except for the version, for quite a while. Are you saying something is broke and it works for me?? O_O Seriously?? This is a joke right?? No joke, I assure you. As Markos pointed out, a bug has already been opened, and I fell over it with a vanilla make.conf. Unless someone knows of a work-around, I'll stick with the old version of portage until the bug-fix reaches the stable system. Try to add -userpriv to your FEATURES (as in FEATURES=-userpriv) in make.conf WKR Hinnerk signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 16:28:55 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?: On Tuesday 10 Sep 2013 16:48:24 Hinnerk van Bruinehsen wrote: Try [adding] -userpriv to your FEATURES (as in FEATURES=-userpriv) in make.conf Nope. Didn't help. I see mention of usersync in the bug conversation, but I don't know what that means. I'll just wait for the fixed version, I think. I did the following: chown -R portage:portage /usr/portage /var/lib/portage /usr/local/portage and that fixed things. This assumes you use a userid of portage in a group named portage to maintain your system. -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* dwn...@ntlworld.com (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
Wow... just noticed an update is available which, for me, means it has been stabilized (at least on amd64)... You'd think this would rate a news item and/or other major announcement, considering how long it has taken to get here... Anyway, really glad to see this happen, and thanks to the devs for getting it here! Now to wait a few days to see if there is any breakage to report (not worried about it really, though, since it has actually gotten a ton of testing over the last year or two)...
Re: [gentoo-user] Portage 2.2.1 stabilized?
On 9 September 2013 09:44, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: Wow... just noticed an update is available which, for me, means it has been stabilized (at least on amd64)... You'd think this would rate a news item and/or other major announcement, considering how long it has taken to get here... Anyway, really glad to see this happen, and thanks to the devs for getting it here! Now to wait a few days to see if there is any breakage to report (not worried about it really, though, since it has actually gotten a ton of testing over the last year or two)... I agree that this kind of deserves a news post just because of how momentous the occasion is, however there should not be many breakages from this as most of the features have already been in the last stable portage (such as sets and preserved-rebuild on by default). The biggest changes are probably userpriv and usersync being on by default (which is a recent change). I don't really believe that anyone will be using programmatic custom sets for a while now, which is the last feature to not be back-patched to 2.1
