Portage issue

View: New views
19 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  
< Prev | 1 - 2 | Next >

Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> On Montag, 4. Februar 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Monday 04 February 2008, Mateusz Mierzwinski wrote:
> > > Portato is GUI for portage/emerge ;).
> >
> > Ermmmmm, hmmmmmmm, what's a GUI?
>
> A GUY who lost his `

<mutter> <mutter> <grumble> <grumble>

These kids with their new-fangled contraptions. I'd just gotten the hang
of W now they want me to switch to X. They say it's New! Improved!
Better! and uses some weird thing called a "mouse". Bloody rodents.

Oh wait, what year did you say it was again?

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, Dale wrote:
> eix is sort of growing on me tho.  I wonder when they will replace it
> with something else??

You've only just found eix????!!!!???? You must have bandwidth
issues :-) :-)

eix is the best thing to hit portage since portage. Or maybe paludis. I
find gentoo virtually unusable without eix

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:13:26 -0200, Ricardo Saffi Marques wrote:
> > GUI = Graphical User Interface
>
> Really? You don't say! ;-)
>
> PS Please don't top post. Flow of text messes up it does. Harder
> reading makes much.

Yoda, is that really you?

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, Daniel Pielmeier wrote:
> > [blocks B     ] kde-base/ksync (is blocking
> > kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.8-r10)
>
> I think somebody has mentioned this before ksync is part of the new
> kdelibs so unmerge it to merge the new kdelibs.
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/desktop/kde/kde-expat-upgrading.xml

Maybe I should explain a bit more in detail how the OP should fix this,
as finding kde blockers between the -meta and monolithic ebuilds is not
a cut and dried process.

First, I assume he has read the emerging KDE howto on the gentoo docs
site, and understands the difference between -meta ebuilds, monolithic
ebuilds and package ebuilds. There's not much to indicate which is
which except that the -meta ebuilds have -meta in their name. Over time
I have learned which are the packages distributed by kde.org and now
recognize them by name. The monolithic ebuilds must then be the same
without the -meta name. So, everything else is probably a package
ebuild.

Golden rule: You cannot mix these types, you must use one or the other.
To determine blockers, there's no command I know of that does
eg "equery blocks <package>" so I resort to good old grep:

alan@nazgul ~ $ grep -r ksync /var/portage/kde-base/*/*ebuild | grep
kdelibs
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.7-r1.ebuild:  !kde-base/ksync"
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.7-r2.ebuild:  !kde-base/ksync"
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.7-r3.ebuild:  !kde-base/ksync"
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.8.ebuild:     !kde-base/ksync"
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.8-r1.ebuild:  !kde-base/ksync"
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.8-r2.ebuild:  !kde-base/ksync"
/var/portage/kde-base/kdelibs/kdelibs-3.5.8-r3.ebuild:  !kde-base/ksync"

So, kdelibs will not install along with ksync. Now to determine what
installs ksync:

alan@nazgul ~ $ equery depends ksync
[ Searching for packages depending on ksync... ]

No results. Bugger. That means I don't have ksync installed, so equery
can't find the info for me. Time to search the tree (this is slooooow).
So one cup of coffee later:

alan@nazgul ~ $ equery depends -a ksync
[ Searching for packages depending on ksync... ]
app-pda/syncekonnector-0.3_pre20060117 (=kde-base/ksync-3.5*)
app-pda/syncekonnector-0.3.2 (=kde-base/ksync-3.5*)
kde-base/kdepim-meta-3.5.5 (~kde-base/ksync-3.5.5)
kde-base/kdepim-meta-3.5.6 (~kde-base/ksync-3.5.6)

OK, Now we are getting there. kdepim-meta will install all sub-packages
of kdepim. syncekonnector (probably part of kdepim-meta too) will also
install ksync. Plus, kdepim (monolithic) will install all the same
files as kdepim-meta, but not as individual packages. On to solutions
for the OPs problem:

Don't merge ksync, do merge kdepim.
Convert to the -meta ebuilds and emerge ksync.

This last is a lot of effort but worth it. I did it by running "eix kde"
and listing what I had, unmerge the monolithic ebuilds and merge the
corresponding -meta ones. It's an iterative process, I had to go back
and find more stuff to unmerge once or twice.

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Dale-31 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Stroller wrote:

>
> On 4 Feb 2008, at 11:29, Dale wrote:
>> ...
>> eix is sort of growing on me tho.  I wonder when they will replace it
>> with something else??
>
> I've been using eix for a while & am really comfortable with it.
>
> Replacement would seem to be WELL overdue, by my previous experiences
> with Gentoo tools.
>
> Stroller.

Yea, when I got sort of used to etcat, they replaced it with eix.  I
just recently started to really using eix a fair bit.  I suspect they
are getting a new thing ready.  Sort of keep me confused ya know.   ;-)

Oh well, at least it keeps getting better.  LFS would be fun for sure.
We'd be writing scripts like crazy.  LOL

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-)
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by brullo nulla :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Alan McKinnon ha scritto:

> On Monday 04 February 2008, b.n. wrote:
>> Alan McKinnon ha scritto:
>>> On Monday 04 February 2008, Mateusz Mierzwinski wrote:
>>>> Portato is GUI for portage/emerge ;).
>>> Ermmmmm, hmmmmmmm, what's a GUI?
>> Graphical User Interface.
>>
>> Usually compared to a CLI, Command Line Interface.
>
> I know, I had my tongue very firmly in my cheek when I made that
> post :-)

Ops. My irony sensors must be badly broken today. Probably spending
nights writing a badly procrastinated ph.d. thesis does not help. :)

> I can't imagine how one would run portage in a GUI - to me it's very
> much a command line job

Well, on Debian-like systems I absolutely *love* Synaptic. To me, it's
what a user-friendly package manager should look like.
I have only very little experience with Portage GUIs. Problem, it seems,
is that there isn't one single project where people is focused (Kuroo,
Porthole, and now Portato which I didn't know).

The Portage CLI is fine with me, but I'd like to know about the GUI
options. They can always be handy.

(On my wild dreams, once I thought to write a Python-based FUSE
filesystem abstracting Portage. I did never ever went further than the
very early planning phase, mostly because FUSE documentation was a
nightmare. I'd like to know what people think of it,anyway.)

m.
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, Dale wrote:
> Oh well, at least it keeps getting better.  LFS would be fun for
> sure. We'd be writing scripts like crazy.  LOL

Gentoo: Build your own kit car! Just need spanners!

LFS: Build your own spanners to build your own kit car! Oh, and you need
to design it yourself. We'll sell you the sheet metal for the body
though :-)

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, b.n. wrote:
> On my wild dreams, once I thought to write a Python-based FUSE
> filesystem abstracting Portage.

I'm confused by this. Portage is already a filesystem, why would you
want to abstract a filesystem as a filesystem...? I can't see the point

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Neil Bothwick :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:12:55 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> Oh wait, what year did you say it was again?

MMIIX


--
Neil Bothwick

Every time I jump on the bandwagon all its wheels fall off.


signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment

Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:12:55 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Oh wait, what year did you say it was again?
>
> MMIIX

You bugger you. Now I have to dig back 25 years in memory to high school
Latin classes to decode that.

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Peter Humphrey-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Monday 04 February 2008 21:09:14 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Monday 04 February 2008, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 17:12:55 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > Oh wait, what year did you say it was again?
> >
> > MMIIX
>
> You bugger you. Now I have to dig back 25 years in memory to high school
> Latin classes to decode that.

You whipper-snapper you. 25 years? 52 in my case.

--
Rgds
Peter
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Michael Schmarck :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Hello!

Alan McKinnon-2 wrote:
On Sunday 03 February 2008, Robert Stockdale IV wrote:

> [blocks B     ] <sys-apps/portage-2.1.4_rc1 (is blocking
> app-shells/bash- 3.2_p33)

emerge --sync, there is a later version of portage in the tree that bash
does not block
Hm. Are you sure?

I just installed 2007.0 and set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86. I then
did a emerge --sync followed by an "emerge -vat portage". Result:

test9 / # emerge -vat portage

These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order:

Calculating dependencies... done!
[nomerge      ] sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.4 [2.1.2.2] USE="-build -doc -epydoc (-selinux)" LINGUAS="-pl"
[ebuild     U ]  app-shells/bash-3.2_p33 [3.1_p17] USE="-afs -bashlogger nls -plugins% -vanilla" 2,564 kB
[ebuild     U ] sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.4 [2.1.2.2] USE="-build -doc -epydoc (-selinux)" LINGUAS="-pl" 368 kB
[nomerge      ]  dev-lang/python-2.5.1-r5  USE="berkdb -bootstrap -build -doc -examples gdbm -ipv6 ncurses -nothreads readline -sqlite ssl -tk -ucs2"
[ebuild  N    ]   app-admin/python-updater-0.4  4 kB
[ebuild  NS   ]  dev-lang/python-2.5.1-r5  USE="berkdb -bootstrap -build -doc -examples gdbm -ipv6 ncurses -nothreads readline -sqlite ssl -tk -ucs2" 9,174 kB
[ebuild     U ]  sys-apps/sandbox-1.2.18.1-r2 [1.2.17] 232 kB
[blocks B     ] <sys-apps/portage-2.1.4_rc1 (is blocking app-shells/bash-3.2_p33)

Total: 5 packages (3 upgrades, 1 new, 1 in new slot, 1 block), Size of downloads: 12,338 kB

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

For more information about Blocked Packages, please refer to the following
section of the Gentoo Linux x86 Handbook (architecture is irrelevant):

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?full=1#blocked

How do you get around this blocker?

Thanks,
Michael
--
Michael Schmarck
michael.schmarck@...

Re: Portage issue

by Michael Schmarck :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Michael Schmarck <michael.schmarck <at> habmalnefrage.de> writes:


> These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [nomerge      ] sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.4 [2.1.2.2] USE="-build -doc -epydoc
> (-selinux)" LINGUAS="-pl"
> [ebuild     U ]  app-shells/bash-3.2_p33 [3.1_p17] USE="-afs -bashlogger nls
> -plugins% -vanilla" 2,564 kB
[...]
> [blocks B     ] <sys-apps/portage-2.1.4_rc1 (is blocking
> app-shells/bash-3.2_p33)
>
> Total: 5 packages (3 upgrades, 1 new, 1 in new slot, 1 block), Size of
> downloads: 12,338 kB
>
> !!! Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
> installed
> !!!        at the same time on the same system.
[...]
> How do you get around this blocker?

emerge -1av =app-shells/bash-3.2_p17-r1 && emerge portage

That solved it for me.

Cheers,
Michael

--
gentoo-user@... mailing list

--
Michael Schmarck
michael.schmarck@...

Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Tuesday 19 February 2008, Michael Schmarck wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Alan McKinnon-2 wrote:
> > On Sunday 03 February 2008, Robert Stockdale IV wrote:
> >> [blocks B     ] <sys-apps/portage-2.1.4_rc1 (is blocking
> >> app-shells/bash- 3.2_p33)
> >
> > emerge --sync, there is a later version of portage in the tree that
> > bash does not block
>
> Hm. Are you sure?

Not so much anymore...

One of the admins at work is having similar troubles with a machine not
updated for a while. I didn't go through this on my notebook which is
updated weekly, so perhaps I hit an ideal window of opportunity between
commits.

Let's look at this in more detail:

You have portage-2.1.2.2 and want to upgrade to 2.1.4.4
You have bash-3.1_p17 and want to upgrade to 3.2_33

bash-3.1_p17 has no DEPEND blockers
bash-3.2-p17-r1 has no DEPEND blockers
bash-3.2_p33 blocks <portage-2.1.4-rc1

portage-2.1.2.12 requires >=app-shells/bash-3.1_p17
portage-2.1.3.19 requires >=app-shells/bash-3.2_p17
portage-2.1.4.4  requires >=app-shells/bash-3.2_p17


Ignore the conditional blocker from portage as you should not have build
in USE. Now aside from what on earth certain versions of portage have
to do with certain versions of bash...

try this:

emerge bash-3.2-p17-r1
emerge portage
emerge bash

> I just installed 2007.0 and set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86. I then
> did a emerge --sync followed by an "emerge -vat portage". Result:
>
> test9 / # emerge -vat portage
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [nomerge      ] sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.4 [2.1.2.2] USE="-build -doc
> -epydoc (-selinux)" LINGUAS="-pl"
> [ebuild     U ]  app-shells/bash-3.2_p33 [3.1_p17] USE="-afs
> -bashlogger nls -plugins% -vanilla" 2,564 kB
> [ebuild     U ] sys-apps/portage-2.1.4.4 [2.1.2.2] USE="-build -doc
> -epydoc (-selinux)" LINGUAS="-pl" 368 kB
> [nomerge      ]  dev-lang/python-2.5.1-r5  USE="berkdb -bootstrap
> -build -doc -examples gdbm -ipv6 ncurses -nothreads readline -sqlite
> ssl -tk -ucs2" [ebuild  N    ]   app-admin/python-updater-0.4  4 kB
> [ebuild  NS   ]  dev-lang/python-2.5.1-r5  USE="berkdb -bootstrap
> -build -doc -examples gdbm -ipv6 ncurses -nothreads readline -sqlite
> ssl -tk -ucs2" 9,174 kB
> [ebuild     U ]  sys-apps/sandbox-1.2.18.1-r2 [1.2.17] 232 kB
> [blocks B     ] <sys-apps/portage-2.1.4_rc1 (is blocking
> app-shells/bash-3.2_p33)
>
> Total: 5 packages (3 upgrades, 1 new, 1 in new slot, 1 block), Size
> of downloads: 12,338 kB
>
> !!! Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
> installed
> !!!        at the same time on the same system.
>
> For more information about Blocked Packages, please refer to the
> following section of the Gentoo Linux x86 Handbook (architecture is
> irrelevant):
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?full=1#blocked
>
> How do you get around this blocker?
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
> -----
> --
> Michael Schmarck
> michael.schmarck@...
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Portage-issue-tp15256634p15562413.html Sent
> from the gentoo-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Michael Schmarck :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Good morning!

Alan McKinnon-2 wrote:
On Tuesday 19 February 2008, Michael Schmarck wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Alan McKinnon-2 wrote:
> > On Sunday 03 February 2008, Robert Stockdale IV wrote:
> >> [blocks B     ] <sys-apps/portage-2.1.4_rc1 (is blocking
> >> app-shells/bash- 3.2_p33)
> >
> > emerge --sync, there is a later version of portage in the tree that
> > bash does not block
>
> Hm. Are you sure?

Not so much anymore...
 

;-)

Alan McKinnon-2 wrote:
try this:

emerge bash-3.2-p17-r1
emerge portage
emerge bash
This worked for me, as I found out a short while after I posted
my original message :) Thanks a lot for your explanation. This
way, it's at least understandable *WHY* this works

Best regards,
Michael
--
Michael Schmarck
michael.schmarck@...

Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Michael Schmarck wrote:

> > emerge bash-3.2-p17-r1
> > emerge portage
> > emerge bash
>
> This worked for me, as I found out a short while after I posted
> my original message :) Thanks a lot for your explanation. This
> way, it's at least understandable *WHY* this works ;-)

You're welcome. What I'd like to know is in which universe portage could
block bash <puzzled>

It just sounds a bit daft, sort of like OpenOffice blocking mutt...

--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Rumen Yotov-3 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Alan McKinnon написа:

> On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Michael Schmarck wrote:
>
>>> emerge bash-3.2-p17-r1
>>> emerge portage
>>> emerge bash
>> This worked for me, as I found out a short while after I posted
>> my original message :) Thanks a lot for your explanation. This
>> way, it's at least understandable *WHY* this works ;-)
>
> You're welcome. What I'd like to know is in which universe portage could
> block bash <puzzled>
>
> It just sounds a bit daft, sort of like OpenOffice blocking mutt...
>
Hi,

Thinking about it, much of portage is bash-scripts, no.
Maybe some portage features depend on newer bash functions, just guessing.
HTH. Rumen



smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment

Re: Portage issue

by Willie Wong :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 09:28:57AM +0200, Penguin Lover Rumen Yotov squawked:
> >You're welcome. What I'd like to know is in which universe portage could
> >block bash <puzzled>
> >
> >It just sounds a bit daft, sort of like OpenOffice blocking mutt...
> >
> Thinking about it, much of portage is bash-scripts, no.
> Maybe some portage features depend on newer bash functions, just guessing.
> HTH. Rumen

See bgo#196278 and the bash changelog
 http://tiswww.case.edu/php/chet/bash/COMPAT
In particular point 29 about handling of the % character in parameter
replacement.

In short, bash changes behaviour (another one is how special
characters in regexp inside a test is dealt with; that one bit me
personally). Rather than coding portage to switch function/variable
definitions based on bash version, the portage devs feel that it is
easier to just make it depend on the newer version of bash.

W
--
Microsoft Word told me that instead of having "Windows ME and Linux" as
my computer expertise on my resume, I should have "Windows, Linux, and I".
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 439 days, 14:05
--
gentoo-user@... mailing list


Re: Portage issue

by Alan McKinnon-2 :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

On Wednesday 20 February 2008, Willie Wong wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 09:28:57AM +0200, Penguin Lover Rumen Yotov
squawked:

> > >You're welcome. What I'd like to know is in which universe portage
> > > could block bash <puzzled>
> > >
> > >It just sounds a bit daft, sort of like OpenOffice blocking
> > > mutt...
> >
> > Thinking about it, much of portage is bash-scripts, no.
> > Maybe some portage features depend on newer bash functions, just
> > guessing. HTH. Rumen
>
> See bgo#196278 and the bash changelog
>  http://tiswww.case.edu/php/chet/bash/COMPAT
> In particular point 29 about handling of the % character in parameter
> replacement.
>
> In short, bash changes behaviour (another one is how special
> characters in regexp inside a test is dealt with; that one bit me
> personally).

OK, that now makes a lot of sense, thanks.

> Rather than coding portage to switch function/variable
> definitions based on bash version,

which would be disgustingly ugly :-)

> the portage devs feel that it is
> easier to just make it depend on the newer version of bash.

Yes, a very sane decision


--
Alan McKinnon
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

--
gentoo-user@... mailing list

< Prev | 1 - 2 | Next >