Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Marc Joliet_1]

On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:55:12 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
[...]
>
>Got it, finally :-)
>
>fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
>highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
>not have the flag at all.
>
>Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
>systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
>fail2ban with something equivalent

That'll be because the systemd python bindings were split into a separate 
package upstream.  But fail2ban already depends on it:

systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
)' 'python*' ) )

So maybe the OP just needs to unmask python-systemd?

HTH
-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> 
>> On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
 The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
>
> It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
> true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
>
> RDEPEND="
> ...
> systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
> dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>
>
> I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
> the way. What are your results for:
>
> emerge --info
> grep -r python /etc/portage
> grep -r systemd /etc/portage
>>> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
>>> portage, certainly the systemd one.
>>
>>
>> I'm having a hard time figuring out what is making portage do this.
>> I also figure you're OK with a downgraded systemd meanwhile, but just
>> for kicks, lets test my theory: If you run this, does portage offer to
>> upgrade systemd?
>>
>>
>> USE="-python" emerge -pv systemd
> 
> Well, here is what I got
> [ebuild U  ] sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo [219_p112:0/2::gentoo]
> USE="acl kdbus* kmod lz4 pam policykit seccomp ssl -apparmor -audit
> -cryptsetup -curl -elfutils -gcrypt -gnuefi% -http -idn -importd -lzma
> -nat -qrcode (-selinux) -sysv-utils {-test} -vanilla -xkb (-doc%*)
> (-gudev%) (-introspection%*) (-python%*)
> (-terminal%)" ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
> PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%)"
> PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%*)" 3,788 KiB
> 
> Total: 1 package (1 upgrade), Size of downloads: 3,788 KiB
> 
> !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been
> pulled
> !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
> 
> sys-apps/systemd:0
> 
>   (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled
>   in by
> sys-apps/systemd (Argument)
> 
>   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> 
> sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-)?,python_single_target_python2_7(+)?,python_targets_python3_3(-)?,python_single_target_python3_3(+)?,python_targets_python3_4(-)?,python_single_target_python3_4(+)?]
> required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)



Got it, finally :-)

fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
not have the flag at all.

Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
fail2ban with something equivalent


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

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> Got it, finally :-)
>
> fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
> highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
> not have the flag at all.
>
> Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
> systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
> fail2ban with something equivalent
>

Sounds like this is covered by:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558168
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=02

It seems to me like this is a portage issue with the resolver.
Running emerge -1 python-systemd sounds like it fixes the issue.
Apparently once it is installed portage will figure out it needs to
hang onto it.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 01/09/2015 12:18, Marc Joliet_1 wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 September 2015 11:55:12 Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> Got it, finally :-)
>>
>> fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
>> highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
>> not have the flag at all.
>>
>> Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
>> systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
>> fail2ban with something equivalent
> 
> That'll be because the systemd python bindings were split into a separate 
> package upstream.  But fail2ban already depends on it:
> 
>   systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
>   dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>   sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>   )' 'python*' ) )
> 
> So maybe the OP just needs to unmask python-systemd?


That makes sense.


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

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Rich Freeman]

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:13 AM,   wrote:
> Rich Freeman  wrote:
>>
>> Sounds like this is covered by:
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558168
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=02
>>
>> It seems to me like this is a portage issue with the resolver.
>> Running emerge -1 python-systemd sounds like it fixes the issue.
>> Apparently once it is installed portage will figure out it needs to
>> hang onto it.
>
> And portage will not let me do that even though I have removed the
> explicit python use flag from sys-apps/systemd -- in fact it will not
> let me reinstall the same version of systemd without the python use
> flag.
>

Can you attach the emerge output of "emerge -1 python-systemd" ?  I
don't see that anywhere in this thread.

As far as I can tell everything should work as long as you emerge that
first, or on the same command line as fail2ban, as the bug indicates.
You shouldn't have to mess with any systemd USE flag settings if
you're on ~amd64, and in theory touching the flag won't change
anything anyway.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Rich Freeman  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> > Got it, finally :-)
> >
> > fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
> > highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
> > not have the flag at all.
> >
> > Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
> > systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
> > fail2ban with something equivalent
> >
> 
> Sounds like this is covered by:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558168
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=02
> 
> It seems to me like this is a portage issue with the resolver.
> Running emerge -1 python-systemd sounds like it fixes the issue.
> Apparently once it is installed portage will figure out it needs to
> hang onto it.

And portage will not let me do that even though I have removed the
explicit python use flag from sys-apps/systemd -- in fact it will not
let me reinstall the same version of systemd without the python use
flag.


-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Rich Freeman  wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:13 AM,   wrote:
> > Rich Freeman  wrote:
> >>
> >> Sounds like this is covered by:
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=558168
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=02
> >>
> >> It seems to me like this is a portage issue with the resolver.
> >> Running emerge -1 python-systemd sounds like it fixes the issue.
> >> Apparently once it is installed portage will figure out it needs to
> >> hang onto it.
> >
> > And portage will not let me do that even though I have removed the
> > explicit python use flag from sys-apps/systemd -- in fact it will not
> > let me reinstall the same version of systemd without the python use
> > flag.
> >
> 
> Can you attach the emerge output of "emerge -1 python-systemd" ?  I
> don't see that anywhere in this thread.
> 
> As far as I can tell everything should work as long as you emerge that
> first, or on the same command line as fail2ban, as the bug indicates.
> You shouldn't have to mess with any systemd USE flag settings if
> you're on ~amd64, and in theory touching the flag won't change
> anything anyway.

Here it is, I filed a bug anyway against fail2ban.

[ebuild  N ] dev-python/python-systemd-230::gentoo
PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_4 -python3_3" 39 KiB
[blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[python(-)]
("sys-apps/systemd[python(-)]" is blocking
dev-python/python-systemd-230)

Total: 1 package (1 new), Size of downloads: 39 KiB
Conflict: 1 block (1 unsatisfied)

 * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
 * installed at the same time on the same system.

  (dev-python/python-systemd-230:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for
  merge) pulled in by
python-systemd
 
-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> > 
> >> On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>  The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
> >
> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
> > true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
> >
> > RDEPEND="
> > ...
> > systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
> > dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> > sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> >
> >
> > I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
> > the way. What are your results for:
> >
> > emerge --info
> > grep -r python /etc/portage
> > grep -r systemd /etc/portage
> >>> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> >>> portage, certainly the systemd one.
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm having a hard time figuring out what is making portage do this.
> >> I also figure you're OK with a downgraded systemd meanwhile, but just
> >> for kicks, lets test my theory: If you run this, does portage offer to
> >> upgrade systemd?
> >>
> >>
> >> USE="-python" emerge -pv systemd
> > 
> > Well, here is what I got
> > [ebuild U  ] sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo [219_p112:0/2::gentoo]
> > USE="acl kdbus* kmod lz4 pam policykit seccomp ssl -apparmor -audit
> > -cryptsetup -curl -elfutils -gcrypt -gnuefi% -http -idn -importd -lzma
> > -nat -qrcode (-selinux) -sysv-utils {-test} -vanilla -xkb (-doc%*)
> > (-gudev%) (-introspection%*) (-python%*)
> > (-terminal%)" ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
> > PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%)"
> > PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%*)" 3,788 KiB
> > 
> > Total: 1 package (1 upgrade), Size of downloads: 3,788 KiB
> > 
> > !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been
> > pulled
> > !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
> > 
> > sys-apps/systemd:0
> > 
> >   (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled
> >   in by
> > sys-apps/systemd (Argument)
> > 
> >   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> > 
> > sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-)?,python_single_target_python2_7(+)?,python_targets_python3_3(-)?,python_single_target_python3_3(+)?,python_targets_python3_4(-)?,python_single_target_python3_4(+)?]
> > required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> 
> 
> 
> Got it, finally :-)
> 
> fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
> highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
> not have the flag at all.
> 
> Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
> systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
> fail2ban with something equivalent

I do need fail2ban, so should I file a bug against it?


-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 01/09/2015 13:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> 
>> On 01/09/2015 02:12, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>>> Alan McKinnon  wrote:
>>>
 On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
>>>
>>> It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
>>> true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
>>>
>>> RDEPEND="
>>> ...
>>> systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
>>> dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>>> sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
>>> the way. What are your results for:
>>>
>>> emerge --info
>>> grep -r python /etc/portage
>>> grep -r systemd /etc/portage
> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> portage, certainly the systemd one.


 I'm having a hard time figuring out what is making portage do this.
 I also figure you're OK with a downgraded systemd meanwhile, but just
 for kicks, lets test my theory: If you run this, does portage offer to
 upgrade systemd?


 USE="-python" emerge -pv systemd
>>>
>>> Well, here is what I got
>>> [ebuild U  ] sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo [219_p112:0/2::gentoo]
>>> USE="acl kdbus* kmod lz4 pam policykit seccomp ssl -apparmor -audit
>>> -cryptsetup -curl -elfutils -gcrypt -gnuefi% -http -idn -importd -lzma
>>> -nat -qrcode (-selinux) -sysv-utils {-test} -vanilla -xkb (-doc%*)
>>> (-gudev%) (-introspection%*) (-python%*)
>>> (-terminal%)" ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
>>> PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%)"
>>> PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%*)" 3,788 KiB
>>>
>>> Total: 1 package (1 upgrade), Size of downloads: 3,788 KiB
>>>
>>> !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been
>>> pulled
>>> !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
>>>
>>> sys-apps/systemd:0
>>>
>>>   (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled
>>>   in by
>>> sys-apps/systemd (Argument)
>>>
>>>   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>> 
>>> sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-)?,python_single_target_python2_7(+)?,python_targets_python3_3(-)?,python_single_target_python3_3(+)?,python_targets_python3_4(-)?,python_single_target_python3_4(+)?]
>>> required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>
>>
>>
>> Got it, finally :-)
>>
>> fail2ban wants sys-apps/systemd[python(-)], and systemd-219_p112 is the
>> highest version with an explicit python USE flag. All later versions do
>> not have the flag at all.
>>
>> Your choices are either to have fail2ban fixed to deal with recent
>> systemd USE, and tolerate the systemd downgrade meanwhile; or to replace
>> fail2ban with something equivalent
> 
> I do need fail2ban, so should I file a bug against it?


Yes, definitely. There's a problem with fail2ban, or with portage's
resolver, or with our ability to read portage operators, I'm not sure
which :-)

The package maintainer is in a position to help out here.


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

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 31/08/2015 16:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> 
>> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
 A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
>
> sysv-utils? (
> !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> !sys-apps/sysvinit )
>
> That's a hard blocker, no way round it. It's in all the systemd ebuilds
> for the current unstable versions.
>
> Do you have USE="sysv-utils" set for sysvinit?
>
> If so, to have both sysvinit and systemd, you will have to disable that
> USE flag and see what comes next.
>>> I put that use flag in there because I thought it would allow systemd to
>>> generate a service from a script in /etc/init.d, but I will see what
>>> happens when I remove that flag or maybe if there is another way to
>>> accomplish that?
>>> Well, that did it!  It still is downgrading systemd, but that's not too
>>> bad, thanks guys.
>>
>> $ euses -sf sysv-utils
>> sys-apps/systemd:sysv-utils - Install sysvinit compatibility symlinks
>> and manpages for init, telinit, halt, poweroff, reboot, runlevel, and
>> shutdown
>>
>>
>> That description is quite vague, and could mean many things. I'm no
>> expert on systemd, but I would imagine that it already has it's own
>> scripts to deal with those listed functions. I wonder what the use of
>> the flag is then? Perhaps an old compatibility layer than is not needed now?
>>
>>
>> I can't see a reason why systemd is being downgraded; the previous
>> output either lists just "sys-apps/systemd" or uses a ">=" operator.
>> Nothing to say why 219_p112 is the highest usable version.
>>
>> Once the emerge finishes and portage has done what it wants, run these
>> commands:
>>
>> emerge -pv systemd
>> emerge -pv =systemd-225
>>
>> (225 being latest in the tree). Then we can see better why portage is
>> doing what it does
>>
>>
>>
> 
> I think it has something to do with fail2ban -- the version of systemd
> in the tree after the 219 version is 224-r1 and 225 and now portage is
> saying
> WARNING: One or more updates/rebuilds have been skipped due to a
> dependency conflict:
> and one of those says 
>   (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
>   conflicts with^M
> 
> sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-),python_single_target_python2_7(+),python_targets_python3_4(-)]
> required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> Does that make sense?
> 

The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)

It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:

RDEPEND="
...
systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]


I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
the way. What are your results for:

emerge --info
grep -r python /etc/portage
grep -r systemd /etc/portage


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

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> On 31/08/2015 16:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> > 
> >> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>  A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
> >
> > sysv-utils? (
> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
> >
> > That's a hard blocker, no way round it. It's in all the systemd ebuilds
> > for the current unstable versions.
> >
> > Do you have USE="sysv-utils" set for sysvinit?
> >
> > If so, to have both sysvinit and systemd, you will have to disable that
> > USE flag and see what comes next.
> >>> I put that use flag in there because I thought it would allow systemd to
> >>> generate a service from a script in /etc/init.d, but I will see what
> >>> happens when I remove that flag or maybe if there is another way to
> >>> accomplish that?
> >>> Well, that did it!  It still is downgrading systemd, but that's not too
> >>> bad, thanks guys.
> >>
> >> $ euses -sf sysv-utils
> >> sys-apps/systemd:sysv-utils - Install sysvinit compatibility symlinks
> >> and manpages for init, telinit, halt, poweroff, reboot, runlevel, and
> >> shutdown
> >>
> >>
> >> That description is quite vague, and could mean many things. I'm no
> >> expert on systemd, but I would imagine that it already has it's own
> >> scripts to deal with those listed functions. I wonder what the use of
> >> the flag is then? Perhaps an old compatibility layer than is not needed 
> >> now?
> >>
> >>
> >> I can't see a reason why systemd is being downgraded; the previous
> >> output either lists just "sys-apps/systemd" or uses a ">=" operator.
> >> Nothing to say why 219_p112 is the highest usable version.
> >>
> >> Once the emerge finishes and portage has done what it wants, run these
> >> commands:
> >>
> >> emerge -pv systemd
> >> emerge -pv =systemd-225
> >>
> >> (225 being latest in the tree). Then we can see better why portage is
> >> doing what it does
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > I think it has something to do with fail2ban -- the version of systemd
> > in the tree after the 219 version is 224-r1 and 225 and now portage is
> > saying
> > WARNING: One or more updates/rebuilds have been skipped due to a
> > dependency conflict:
> > and one of those says 
> >   (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
> >   conflicts with^M
> > 
> > sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-),python_single_target_python2_7(+),python_targets_python3_4(-)]
> > required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> > Does that make sense?
> > 
> 
> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
> 
> It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
> true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
> 
> RDEPEND="
> ...
> systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
> dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> 
> 
> I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
> the way. What are your results for:
> 
> emerge --info
> grep -r python /etc/portage
> grep -r systemd /etc/portage
Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
portage, certainly the systemd one.
emerge --info
Portage 2.2.20.1 (python 2.7.10-final-0, 
default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome, gcc-4.9.3, glibc-2.21-r1, 3.16.3-gentoo 
x86_64)
=
System uname: 
Linux-3.16.3-gentoo-x86_64-Intel-R-_Core-TM-_i7-2600_CPU_@_3.40GHz-with-gentoo-2.2
KiB Mem:16451492 total,   8652740 free
KiB Swap:2097148 total,   2063580 free
Timestamp of repository gentoo: Sun, 30 Aug 2015 19:30:01 +
sh bash 4.3_p39
ld GNU ld (Gentoo 2.25.1 p1.0) 2.25.1
app-shells/bash:  4.3_p39::gentoo
dev-java/java-config: 2.2.0::gentoo
dev-lang/perl:5.22.0::gentoo
dev-lang/python:  2.7.10::gentoo, 3.3.5-r1::gentoo, 3.4.3::gentoo
dev-util/cmake:   3.3.0::gentoo
dev-util/pkgconfig:   0.28-r3::gentoo
sys-apps/baselayout:  2.2::gentoo
sys-apps/openrc:  0.17::gentoo
sys-apps/sandbox: 2.6-r1::gentoo
sys-devel/autoconf:   2.13::gentoo, 2.69-r1::gentoo
sys-devel/automake:   1.9.6-r3::gentoo, 1.10.3::gentoo, 1.11.6-r1::gentoo, 
1.12.6::gentoo, 1.13.4::gentoo, 1.14.1::gentoo, 1.15::gentoo
sys-devel/binutils:   2.25.1::gentoo
sys-devel/gcc:4.9.3::gentoo
sys-devel/gcc-config: 1.8::gentoo
sys-devel/libtool:2.4.6-r1::gentoo
sys-devel/make:   4.1-r1::gentoo
sys-kernel/linux-headers: 4.1::gentoo (virtual/os-headers)
sys-libs/glibc:   2.21-r1::gentoo
Repositories:

gentoo
location: /usr/portage
sync-type: rsync
sync-uri: rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage
priority: -1000

local_ebuilds
location: /usr/local/portage
masters: 

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Neil Bothwick]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:54:47 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:

> EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ask --color=n  --verbose --nospinner
> --autounmask=n --quiet-build=n"

Get rid of the --verbose flag as a default. Part of the reason the output
from portage is so confusing is that there is so much of it, --verbose
adds even more noise. By all means use it on those occasions you need
more information, but as a default it just hides the real information
among a load of noise.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

  Windows 98 took us to the edge of the cliff.
With Windows XP we took a big step forward.


pgpeB5z91Gh1V.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Neil Bothwick  wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 12:54:47 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> 
> > EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ask --color=n  --verbose --nospinner
> > --autounmask=n --quiet-build=n"
> 
> Get rid of the --verbose flag as a default. Part of the reason the output
> from portage is so confusing is that there is so much of it, --verbose
> adds even more noise. By all means use it on those occasions you need
> more information, but as a default it just hides the real information
> among a load of noise.

OK, I will see if I get better output that way.  I am sure I had a
reason for doing it, maybe some recomendation, but I can't remember
anymore.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
>> > 
>> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
>> > true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
>> > 
>> > RDEPEND="
>> > ...
>> > systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
>> > dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>> > sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
>> > 
>> > 
>> > I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
>> > the way. What are your results for:
>> > 
>> > emerge --info
>> > grep -r python /etc/portage
>> > grep -r systemd /etc/portage
> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> portage, certainly the systemd one.


I'm having a hard time figuring out what is making portage do this.
I also figure you're OK with a downgraded systemd meanwhile, but just
for kicks, lets test my theory: If you run this, does portage offer to
upgrade systemd?


USE="-python" emerge -pv systemd

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

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Jeremi Piotrowski]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:

[snip]

> Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> portage, certainly the systemd one.
> emerge --info
> Portage 2.2.20.1 (python 2.7.10-final-0, 
> default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome, gcc-4.9.3, glibc-2.21-r1, 
> 3.16.3-gentoo x86_64)

I think this is your problem right here: you don't have the systemd
profile selected. You're trying to splice together the use settings needed
to get this to work when all of them are already gathered in the right
profile. 

Remove most of the use settings you were forced to make because of systemd
related issues, change your profile to

default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome/systemd 

and emerge -uDUva @world. 

This should remove most (if not all) of the blockers caused by conflicting
use flags you currently have set.

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> On 31/08/2015 18:54, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >> The words make sense, the meaning doesn't :-)
> >> > 
> >> > It looks like fail2ban wants systemd without python support, but the
> >> > true reason is still hidden. The fail2ban ebuild has this:
> >> > 
> >> > RDEPEND="
> >> > ...
> >> > systemd? ( $(python_gen_cond_dep '|| (
> >> > dev-python/python-systemd[${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> >> > sys-apps/systemd[python(-),${PYTHON_USEDEP}]
> >> > 
> >> > 
> >> > I'm thinking maybe you have a specific portage entry that's getting in
> >> > the way. What are your results for:
> >> > 
> >> > emerge --info
> >> > grep -r python /etc/portage
> >> > grep -r systemd /etc/portage
> > Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> > portage, certainly the systemd one.
> 
> 
> I'm having a hard time figuring out what is making portage do this.
> I also figure you're OK with a downgraded systemd meanwhile, but just
> for kicks, lets test my theory: If you run this, does portage offer to
> upgrade systemd?
> 
> 
> USE="-python" emerge -pv systemd

Well, here is what I got
[ebuild U  ] sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo [219_p112:0/2::gentoo]
USE="acl kdbus* kmod lz4 pam policykit seccomp ssl -apparmor -audit
-cryptsetup -curl -elfutils -gcrypt -gnuefi% -http -idn -importd -lzma
-nat -qrcode (-selinux) -sysv-utils {-test} -vanilla -xkb (-doc%*)
(-gudev%) (-introspection%*) (-python%*)
(-terminal%)" ABI_X86="32 (64) (-x32)"
PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%)"
PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python2_7%*) (-python3_3%) (-python3_4%*)" 3,788 KiB

Total: 1 package (1 upgrade), Size of downloads: 3,788 KiB

!!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been
pulled
!!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:

sys-apps/systemd:0

  (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled
  in by
sys-apps/systemd (Argument)

  (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, installed) pulled in by

sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-)?,python_single_target_python2_7(+)?,python_targets_python3_3(-)?,python_single_target_python3_3(+)?,python_targets_python3_4(-)?,python_single_target_python3_4(+)?]
required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)




It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to
prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also
possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are
impossible to satisfy simultaneously.  If such a conflict exists in
the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can
not be installed simultaneously. You may want to try a larger value of
the --backtrack option, such as --backtrack=30, in order to see if
that will solve this conflict automatically.

For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man
page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
 

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Jeremi Piotrowski  wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > Just to let you know, most of the python entries were mandated by
> > portage, certainly the systemd one.
> > emerge --info
> > Portage 2.2.20.1 (python 2.7.10-final-0, 
> > default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome, gcc-4.9.3, glibc-2.21-r1, 
> > 3.16.3-gentoo x86_64)
> 
> I think this is your problem right here: you don't have the systemd
> profile selected. You're trying to splice together the use settings needed
> to get this to work when all of them are already gathered in the right
> profile. 
> 
> Remove most of the use settings you were forced to make because of systemd
> related issues, change your profile to
> 
> default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome/systemd 
> 
> and emerge -uDUva @world. 
> 
> This should remove most (if not all) of the blockers caused by conflicting
> use flags you currently have set.

Hmmm, how can I tell which use flags to remove?  I could remove the
systemd ones, but what else -- I will look at that directory and see
what it tells me, but any hints would be appreciated.  I wonder if I
started this long enough ago that that profile did not exist?

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Neil Bothwick  wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:19:08 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> 
> > Hi.  On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> > unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> > with inserted comments.  I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> > ncurses-6 for the time being.  Portage also wants to downgrade my
> > systemd from 221(0/2) to 219_p112(0/2).
> > 
> > [blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]
> > ("sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]" is blocking dev-libs/libgudev-230)
> > [blocks B  ] sys-apps/sysvinit ("sys-apps/sysvinit" is blocking
> > sys-apps/systemd-219_p112) [blocks B  ] dev-libs/libgudev
> > ("dev-libs/libgudev" is blocking sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> > 
> You have omitted some important information before this, but the problem
> you have is that something is trying to pull in libgudev, which is
> provided by systemd and well, hence the blocker. Packages should depend on
> virtual/libgudev, which avoids this type of conflict. Run the update
> again --tree to see just what is trying to install libgudev.
> 
> > Total: 75 packages (64 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 7 new, 2 in new slots, 1
> > reinstall), Size of downloads: 273,248 KiB Conflict: 3 blocks (3
> > unsatisfied)
> 
> In this situation, with so many packages being updated, I try to reduce
> the noise from portage by emerge --oneshot-ing anything in the list that
> is not related to the blockers, it makes the tree output much easier to
> work with.

OK, I will try that, I thought it would tell me what is pulling libgudev
in.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Neil Bothwick]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:19:08 -0400, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:

> Hi.  On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> with inserted comments.  I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> ncurses-6 for the time being.  Portage also wants to downgrade my
> systemd from 221(0/2) to 219_p112(0/2).
> 
> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]
> ("sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]" is blocking dev-libs/libgudev-230)
> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/sysvinit ("sys-apps/sysvinit" is blocking
> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112) [blocks B  ] dev-libs/libgudev
> ("dev-libs/libgudev" is blocking sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> 
You have omitted some important information before this, but the problem
you have is that something is trying to pull in libgudev, which is
provided by systemd and well, hence the blocker. Packages should depend on
virtual/libgudev, which avoids this type of conflict. Run the update
again --tree to see just what is trying to install libgudev.

> Total: 75 packages (64 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 7 new, 2 in new slots, 1
> reinstall), Size of downloads: 273,248 KiB Conflict: 3 blocks (3
> unsatisfied)

In this situation, with so many packages being updated, I try to reduce
the noise from portage by emerge --oneshot-ing anything in the list that
is not related to the blockers, it makes the tree output much easier to
work with.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Some people are born mediocre, some people achieve mediocrity, and some
people have mediocrity thrust upon them.  - Joseph Heller, "Catch-22"


pgpQ93SixUEtF.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 31/08/2015 13:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> 
>> On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> answers interleaved
>>
>>
>>> Hi.  On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
>>> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
>>> with inserted comments.  I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
>>> ncurses-6 for the time being.  Portage also wants to downgrade my
>>> systemd from 221(0/2) to 219_p112(0/2).
>>>
>>> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)] ("sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]" 
>>> is blocking dev-libs/libgudev-230)
>>> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/sysvinit ("sys-apps/sysvinit" is blocking 
>>> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
>>> [blocks B  ] dev-libs/libgudev ("dev-libs/libgudev" is blocking 
>>> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
>>
>> These ebuilds are a bit hard to read (they are complex beasts) but it
>> appears that you don't need libgudev anymore. Perhaps it's now part of
>> systemd itself and it's presence requires a systemd that can work with
>> it as you have it?
>>
>> I recommend you unmerge libgudev and try again, let portage figure out
>> what to do. Make a note of your USE for libgudev so you can put it back
>> if needed
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Total: 75 packages (64 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 7 new, 2 in new slots, 1 
>>> reinstall), Size of downloads: 273,248 KiB
>>> Conflict: 3 blocks (3 unsatisfied)
>>>
>>> !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
>>> !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
>>
>> This stuff is just info, portage justifying it's behaviour to you
>> (portage is very verbose at the times you don't want it to be...)
>>
>> It's not upgrading x264 to atest available, everything below is the
>> reason why:
>>
>>>
>>> media-libs/x264:0
>>>
>>>   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20150820:0/148::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
>>> pulled in by
>>> (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
>>
>> This is the latest version in the tree
>>
>>>
>>> If I mask this off, this one goes away, but why is it trying to pull it?
>>>
>>>   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20140308:0/142::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>> >=media-libs/x264-0.0.20090923:0/142= required by 
>>> (media-video/vlc-2.2.1:0/5-8::gentoo, installed)
>>>   ^^^   
>>>
>>
>> vlc needs subslot 0/142 because it's ebuild says so. This can be
>> satisfied, but it's not the latest x264 in the tree, and portage is
>> telling you why
>>
>>
>>> (and 3 more with the same problem)
>>>
>>> net-firewall/iptables:0
>>>
>>>   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r3:0/10::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for 
>>> merge) pulled in by
>>> (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
>>>
>>> And same for this one.
>>>
>>>
>>>   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>> >=net-firewall/iptables-1.4.20:0/0= required by 
>>> (sys-apps/iproute2-4.1.1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>>   ^ 
>>>
>>
>> same general idea as x264
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to
>>> prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also
>>> possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are
>>> impossible to satisfy simultaneously.  If such a conflict exists in
>>> the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can
>>> not be installed simultaneously.
>>>
>>> For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man
>>> page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
>>>
>>>
>>>  * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
>>>  * installed at the same time on the same system.
>>>
>>>   (sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r7:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>> >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r6 required by 
>>> (sys-apps/openrc-0.17:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>> >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.87-r3 required by 
>>> (sys-kernel/dracut-043-r2:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>>
>>>   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
>>> pulled in by
>>> sys-apps/systemd required by (media-sound/mpd-0.19.9-r1:0/0::gentoo, 
>>> installed)
>>> >=sys-apps/systemd-204[pam] required by 
>>> (sys-auth/pambase-20150213:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>> sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-fs/samba-4.1.19:0/0::gentoo, 
>>> installed)
>>> >=sys-apps/systemd-44:0= required by 
>>> (x11-misc/colord-1.2.11:0/2::gentoo, installed)
>>> sys-apps/systemd required by (sys-apps/util-linux-2.26.2:0/0::gentoo, 
>>> installed)
>>> >=sys-apps/systemd-209 required by 
>>> (sys-process/procps-3.3.10-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>> sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-nds/rpcbind-0.2.3:0/0::gentoo, 
>>> installed)
>>> sys-apps/systemd required by 

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> On 31/08/2015 13:03, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Alan McKinnon  wrote:
> > 
> >> On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> answers interleaved
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi.  On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> >>> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> >>> with inserted comments.  I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> >>> ncurses-6 for the time being.  Portage also wants to downgrade my
> >>> systemd from 221(0/2) to 219_p112(0/2).
> >>>
> >>> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)] ("sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]" 
> >>> is blocking dev-libs/libgudev-230)
> >>> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/sysvinit ("sys-apps/sysvinit" is blocking 
> >>> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> >>> [blocks B  ] dev-libs/libgudev ("dev-libs/libgudev" is blocking 
> >>> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> >>
> >> These ebuilds are a bit hard to read (they are complex beasts) but it
> >> appears that you don't need libgudev anymore. Perhaps it's now part of
> >> systemd itself and it's presence requires a systemd that can work with
> >> it as you have it?
> >>
> >> I recommend you unmerge libgudev and try again, let portage figure out
> >> what to do. Make a note of your USE for libgudev so you can put it back
> >> if needed
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Total: 75 packages (64 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 7 new, 2 in new slots, 1 
> >>> reinstall), Size of downloads: 273,248 KiB
> >>> Conflict: 3 blocks (3 unsatisfied)
> >>>
> >>> !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been 
> >>> pulled
> >>> !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
> >>
> >> This stuff is just info, portage justifying it's behaviour to you
> >> (portage is very verbose at the times you don't want it to be...)
> >>
> >> It's not upgrading x264 to atest available, everything below is the
> >> reason why:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> media-libs/x264:0
> >>>
> >>>   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20150820:0/148::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for 
> >>> merge) pulled in by
> >>> (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
> >>
> >> This is the latest version in the tree
> >>
> >>>
> >>> If I mask this off, this one goes away, but why is it trying to pull it?
> >>>
> >>>   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20140308:0/142::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> >>> >=media-libs/x264-0.0.20090923:0/142= required by 
> >>> (media-video/vlc-2.2.1:0/5-8::gentoo, installed)
> >>>   ^^^ 
> >>>  
> >>
> >> vlc needs subslot 0/142 because it's ebuild says so. This can be
> >> satisfied, but it's not the latest x264 in the tree, and portage is
> >> telling you why
> >>
> >>
> >>> (and 3 more with the same problem)
> >>>
> >>> net-firewall/iptables:0
> >>>
> >>>   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r3:0/10::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for 
> >>> merge) pulled in by
> >>> (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
> >>>
> >>> And same for this one.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> >>> >=net-firewall/iptables-1.4.20:0/0= required by 
> >>> (sys-apps/iproute2-4.1.1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> >>>   ^   
> >>>  
> >>
> >> same general idea as x264
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to
> >>> prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also
> >>> possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are
> >>> impossible to satisfy simultaneously.  If such a conflict exists in
> >>> the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can
> >>> not be installed simultaneously.
> >>>
> >>> For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man
> >>> page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
> >>>  * installed at the same time on the same system.
> >>>
> >>>   (sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r7:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> >>> >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r6 required by 
> >>> (sys-apps/openrc-0.17:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> >>> >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.87-r3 required by 
> >>> (sys-kernel/dracut-043-r2:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> >>>
> >>>   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
> >>> pulled in by
> >>> sys-apps/systemd required by (media-sound/mpd-0.19.9-r1:0/0::gentoo, 
> >>> installed)
> >>> >=sys-apps/systemd-204[pam] required by 
> >>> (sys-auth/pambase-20150213:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> >>> sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-fs/samba-4.1.19:0/0::gentoo, 
> >>> installed)
> >>> >=sys-apps/systemd-44:0= required by 
> >>> (x11-misc/colord-1.2.11:0/2::gentoo, installed)
> >>> sys-apps/systemd required by 

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:


answers interleaved


> Hi.  On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> with inserted comments.  I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> ncurses-6 for the time being.  Portage also wants to downgrade my
> systemd from 221(0/2) to 219_p112(0/2).
> 
> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)] ("sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]" is 
> blocking dev-libs/libgudev-230)
> [blocks B  ] sys-apps/sysvinit ("sys-apps/sysvinit" is blocking 
> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> [blocks B  ] dev-libs/libgudev ("dev-libs/libgudev" is blocking 
> sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)

These ebuilds are a bit hard to read (they are complex beasts) but it
appears that you don't need libgudev anymore. Perhaps it's now part of
systemd itself and it's presence requires a systemd that can work with
it as you have it?

I recommend you unmerge libgudev and try again, let portage figure out
what to do. Make a note of your USE for libgudev so you can put it back
if needed


> 
> Total: 75 packages (64 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 7 new, 2 in new slots, 1 
> reinstall), Size of downloads: 273,248 KiB
> Conflict: 3 blocks (3 unsatisfied)
> 
> !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
> !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:

This stuff is just info, portage justifying it's behaviour to you
(portage is very verbose at the times you don't want it to be...)

It's not upgrading x264 to atest available, everything below is the
reason why:

> 
> media-libs/x264:0
> 
>   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20150820:0/148::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
> pulled in by
> (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)

This is the latest version in the tree

> 
> If I mask this off, this one goes away, but why is it trying to pull it?
> 
>   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20140308:0/142::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> >=media-libs/x264-0.0.20090923:0/142= required by 
> (media-video/vlc-2.2.1:0/5-8::gentoo, installed)
>   ^^^ 
>  

vlc needs subslot 0/142 because it's ebuild says so. This can be
satisfied, but it's not the latest x264 in the tree, and portage is
telling you why


> (and 3 more with the same problem)
> 
> net-firewall/iptables:0
> 
>   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r3:0/10::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
> pulled in by
> (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
> 
> And same for this one.
> 
> 
>   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> >=net-firewall/iptables-1.4.20:0/0= required by 
> (sys-apps/iproute2-4.1.1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>   ^   
>  

same general idea as x264

> 
> 
> It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to
> prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also
> possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are
> impossible to satisfy simultaneously.  If such a conflict exists in
> the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can
> not be installed simultaneously.
> 
> For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man
> page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
> 
> 
>  * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
>  * installed at the same time on the same system.
> 
>   (sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r7:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r6 required by 
> (sys-apps/openrc-0.17:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.87-r3 required by 
> (sys-kernel/dracut-043-r2:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> 
>   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled 
> in by
> sys-apps/systemd required by (media-sound/mpd-0.19.9-r1:0/0::gentoo, 
> installed)
> >=sys-apps/systemd-204[pam] required by 
> (sys-auth/pambase-20150213:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-fs/samba-4.1.19:0/0::gentoo, 
> installed)
> >=sys-apps/systemd-44:0= required by (x11-misc/colord-1.2.11:0/2::gentoo, 
> installed)
> sys-apps/systemd required by (sys-apps/util-linux-2.26.2:0/0::gentoo, 
> installed)
> >=sys-apps/systemd-209 required by 
> (sys-process/procps-3.3.10-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-nds/rpcbind-0.2.3:0/0::gentoo, 
> installed)
> sys-apps/systemd required by (app-admin/syslog-ng-3.7.1:0/0::gentoo, 
> ebuild scheduled for merge)
> >=sys-apps/systemd-44:0/2= required by 
> (x11-misc/colord-1.2.11:0/2::gentoo, installed)
> sys-apps/systemd:= required by (net-nds/rpcbind-0.2.3:0/0::gentoo, 
> installed)
> sys-apps/systemd required by 
> (gnome-base/gnome-settings-daemon-3.16.3:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled 

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> On 31/08/2015 06:19, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> 
> 
> answers interleaved
> 
> 
> > Hi.  On my latest update of world, I have a few blockers which I am
> > unable to figure out how to solve -- I will put the related output below
> > with inserted comments.  I am using "unstable" gentooand I have masked
> > ncurses-6 for the time being.  Portage also wants to downgrade my
> > systemd from 221(0/2) to 219_p112(0/2).
> > 
> > [blocks B  ] sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)] ("sys-apps/systemd[gudev(-)]" 
> > is blocking dev-libs/libgudev-230)
> > [blocks B  ] sys-apps/sysvinit ("sys-apps/sysvinit" is blocking 
> > sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> > [blocks B  ] dev-libs/libgudev ("dev-libs/libgudev" is blocking 
> > sys-apps/systemd-219_p112)
> 
> These ebuilds are a bit hard to read (they are complex beasts) but it
> appears that you don't need libgudev anymore. Perhaps it's now part of
> systemd itself and it's presence requires a systemd that can work with
> it as you have it?
> 
> I recommend you unmerge libgudev and try again, let portage figure out
> what to do. Make a note of your USE for libgudev so you can put it back
> if needed
> 
> 
> > 
> > Total: 75 packages (64 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 7 new, 2 in new slots, 1 
> > reinstall), Size of downloads: 273,248 KiB
> > Conflict: 3 blocks (3 unsatisfied)
> > 
> > !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
> > !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
> 
> This stuff is just info, portage justifying it's behaviour to you
> (portage is very verbose at the times you don't want it to be...)
> 
> It's not upgrading x264 to atest available, everything below is the
> reason why:
> 
> > 
> > media-libs/x264:0
> > 
> >   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20150820:0/148::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
> > pulled in by
> > (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
> 
> This is the latest version in the tree
> 
> > 
> > If I mask this off, this one goes away, but why is it trying to pull it?
> > 
> >   (media-libs/x264-0.0.20140308:0/142::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> > >=media-libs/x264-0.0.20090923:0/142= required by 
> > (media-video/vlc-2.2.1:0/5-8::gentoo, installed)
> >   ^^^   
> >
> 
> vlc needs subslot 0/142 because it's ebuild says so. This can be
> satisfied, but it's not the latest x264 in the tree, and portage is
> telling you why
> 
> 
> > (and 3 more with the same problem)
> > 
> > net-firewall/iptables:0
> > 
> >   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r3:0/10::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for 
> > merge) pulled in by
> > (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
> > 
> > And same for this one.
> > 
> > 
> >   (net-firewall/iptables-1.4.21-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> > >=net-firewall/iptables-1.4.20:0/0= required by 
> > (sys-apps/iproute2-4.1.1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> >   ^ 
> >
> 
> same general idea as x264
> 
> > 
> > 
> > It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to
> > prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also
> > possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are
> > impossible to satisfy simultaneously.  If such a conflict exists in
> > the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can
> > not be installed simultaneously.
> > 
> > For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man
> > page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
> > 
> > 
> >  * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
> >  * installed at the same time on the same system.
> > 
> >   (sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r7:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
> > >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r6 required by 
> > (sys-apps/openrc-0.17:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> > >=sys-apps/sysvinit-2.87-r3 required by 
> > (sys-kernel/dracut-043-r2:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> > 
> >   (sys-apps/systemd-219_p112:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
> > pulled in by
> > sys-apps/systemd required by (media-sound/mpd-0.19.9-r1:0/0::gentoo, 
> > installed)
> > >=sys-apps/systemd-204[pam] required by 
> > (sys-auth/pambase-20150213:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> > sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-fs/samba-4.1.19:0/0::gentoo, 
> > installed)
> > >=sys-apps/systemd-44:0= required by 
> > (x11-misc/colord-1.2.11:0/2::gentoo, installed)
> > sys-apps/systemd required by (sys-apps/util-linux-2.26.2:0/0::gentoo, 
> > installed)
> > >=sys-apps/systemd-209 required by 
> > (sys-process/procps-3.3.10-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed)
> > sys-apps/systemd:0/2= required by (net-nds/rpcbind-0.2.3:0/0::gentoo, 
> > installed)
> > sys-apps/systemd required by (app-admin/syslog-ng-3.7.1:0/0::gentoo, 
> > ebuild scheduled for 

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alan McKinnon]

On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
>> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
>> > 
>> > sysv-utils? (
>> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
>> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
>> > 
>> > That's a hard blocker, no way round it. It's in all the systemd ebuilds
>> > for the current unstable versions.
>> > 
>> > Do you have USE="sysv-utils" set for sysvinit?
>> > 
>> > If so, to have both sysvinit and systemd, you will have to disable that
>> > USE flag and see what comes next.
> I put that use flag in there because I thought it would allow systemd to
> generate a service from a script in /etc/init.d, but I will see what
> happens when I remove that flag or maybe if there is another way to
> accomplish that?
> Well, that did it!  It still is downgrading systemd, but that's not too
> bad, thanks guys.

$ euses -sf sysv-utils
sys-apps/systemd:sysv-utils - Install sysvinit compatibility symlinks
and manpages for init, telinit, halt, poweroff, reboot, runlevel, and
shutdown


That description is quite vague, and could mean many things. I'm no
expert on systemd, but I would imagine that it already has it's own
scripts to deal with those listed functions. I wonder what the use of
the flag is then? Perhaps an old compatibility layer than is not needed now?


I can't see a reason why systemd is being downgraded; the previous
output either lists just "sys-apps/systemd" or uses a ">=" operator.
Nothing to say why 219_p112 is the highest usable version.

Once the emerge finishes and portage has done what it wants, run these
commands:

emerge -pv systemd
emerge -pv =systemd-225

(225 being latest in the tree). Then we can see better why portage is
doing what it does




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

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[Alec Ten Harmsel]

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 02:40:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
> >> > 
> >> > sysv-utils? (
> >> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> >> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
> >> > 
> >> > That's a hard blocker, no way round it. It's in all the systemd ebuilds
> >> > for the current unstable versions.
> >> > 
> >> > Do you have USE="sysv-utils" set for sysvinit?
> >> > 
> >> > If so, to have both sysvinit and systemd, you will have to disable that
> >> > USE flag and see what comes next.
> > I put that use flag in there because I thought it would allow systemd to
> > generate a service from a script in /etc/init.d, but I will see what
> > happens when I remove that flag or maybe if there is another way to
> > accomplish that?
> > Well, that did it!  It still is downgrading systemd, but that's not too
> > bad, thanks guys.
> 
> $ euses -sf sysv-utils
> sys-apps/systemd:sysv-utils - Install sysvinit compatibility symlinks
> and manpages for init, telinit, halt, poweroff, reboot, runlevel, and
> shutdown
> 
> 
> That description is quite vague, and could mean many things. I'm no
> expert on systemd, but I would imagine that it already has it's own
> scripts to deal with those listed functions. I wonder what the use of
> the flag is then? Perhaps an old compatibility layer than is not needed now?

This means that it installs /bin/poweroff, /bin/reboot, etc. and the
relevant manpages. I'm pretty sure that's all it does.

It is not needed at all, as long as you don't mind typing `systemctl
poweroff' instead of `poweroff', and so on and so forth. I guess the
/bin/init symlink would be helpful so that you don't have to add
`init=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd' to the kernel commandline, but whatever.

Alec

Re: [gentoo-user] a few blockers I can't figure out

[covici]

Alan McKinnon  wrote:

> On 31/08/2015 13:49, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> >> A clue is in the ebuilds for systemd:
> >> > 
> >> > sysv-utils? (
> >> > !sys-apps/systemd-sysv-utils
> >> > !sys-apps/sysvinit )
> >> > 
> >> > That's a hard blocker, no way round it. It's in all the systemd ebuilds
> >> > for the current unstable versions.
> >> > 
> >> > Do you have USE="sysv-utils" set for sysvinit?
> >> > 
> >> > If so, to have both sysvinit and systemd, you will have to disable that
> >> > USE flag and see what comes next.
> > I put that use flag in there because I thought it would allow systemd to
> > generate a service from a script in /etc/init.d, but I will see what
> > happens when I remove that flag or maybe if there is another way to
> > accomplish that?
> > Well, that did it!  It still is downgrading systemd, but that's not too
> > bad, thanks guys.
> 
> $ euses -sf sysv-utils
> sys-apps/systemd:sysv-utils - Install sysvinit compatibility symlinks
> and manpages for init, telinit, halt, poweroff, reboot, runlevel, and
> shutdown
> 
> 
> That description is quite vague, and could mean many things. I'm no
> expert on systemd, but I would imagine that it already has it's own
> scripts to deal with those listed functions. I wonder what the use of
> the flag is then? Perhaps an old compatibility layer than is not needed now?
> 
> 
> I can't see a reason why systemd is being downgraded; the previous
> output either lists just "sys-apps/systemd" or uses a ">=" operator.
> Nothing to say why 219_p112 is the highest usable version.
> 
> Once the emerge finishes and portage has done what it wants, run these
> commands:
> 
> emerge -pv systemd
> emerge -pv =systemd-225
> 
> (225 being latest in the tree). Then we can see better why portage is
> doing what it does
> 
> 
> 

I think it has something to do with fail2ban -- the version of systemd
in the tree after the 219 version is 224-r1 and 225 and now portage is
saying
WARNING: One or more updates/rebuilds have been skipped due to a
dependency conflict:
and one of those says 
  (sys-apps/systemd-225:0/2::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
  conflicts with^M

sys-apps/systemd[python(-),python_targets_python2_7(-),python_single_target_python2_7(+),python_targets_python3_4(-)]
required by (net-analyzer/fail2ban-0.9.3:0/0::gentoo, installed)
Does that make sense?

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

 John Covici
 cov...@ccs.covici.com