From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MXsWw-0006oJ-4o for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:04:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 80C14E04E3; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:04:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f172.google.com (mail-yw0-f172.google.com [209.85.211.172]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630E7E04E3 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:04:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywh2 with SMTP id 2so7371634ywh.2 for ; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:04:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:in-reply-to :references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer :content-transfer-encoding; bh=nWqOlQHKK9RWUA2uBkn4PCOEvZXeaUdXaVq6owc9+/0=; b=eb3NGREP+NyLh6FLCpe56HFbFYpLYFWyuYsuCYZEreegTyJN3JVuU0FBLEzLk8hrPo pL+ezbOEEruCXxeC9vYjg+K+RxTngnGSgvQS7g3jNLfWtI9YYk/F1iFlLHIZ0rja3bMb Ijc6rD9SxDu5BqbL8T9Qu/r64Je0ekqkjgE3E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id :mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=RCi5tvZiRrRIGudT2AJD44BtlqUexRgxSuZnWCTK+Mat/R5dus1RgsyTyQdkO26mZt Rf0EM2V7IU7jZmjuY+WTeLHPFc0a5leDP3rIcTeTu+kUSC3POxjFNDTVsoNNdvaDy14z oad6PX7wiT0jqztW8pUYvPk4NulGzlRNzzNcM= Received: by 10.150.58.7 with SMTP id g7mr9951326yba.271.1249286664143; Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?24.252.115.177? (ip24-252-115-177.no.no.cox.net [24.252.115.177]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 22sm295685ywh.4.2009.08.03.01.04.22 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Python-updater line 415 error From: Lance Lassetter To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <20090803003643.31db32ad.frank.peters@comcast.net> <1249274558.5149.12.camel@localhost> <20090803015921.f5bf0afd.frank.peters@comcast.net> <1249279663.5149.14.camel@localhost> <20090803021639.3e16463d.frank.peters@comcast.net> <1249280500.5149.15.camel@localhost> <20090803022804.b9e5a8a0.frank.peters@comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 03:04:21 -0500 Message-Id: <1249286661.11683.1.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: a307ee13-0d5e-4761-9ee1-446e0673d92b X-Archives-Hash: c83969ed8105a76a2095809313a5c09d On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 07:12 +0000, Duncan wrote: > Frank Peters posted > 20090803022804.b9e5a8a0.frank.peters@comcast.net, excerpted below, on > Mon, 03 Aug 2009 02:28:04 -0400: > > > On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:21:40 -0500 > > Lance Lassetter wrote: > > > > > > > >> # bash --version > >> GNU bash, version 3.2.39(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Copyright (C) > >> 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > >> > >> > >> > > Thanks again. I thought so. My bash version is 4.0.28(2) and there > > obviously have been some changes. Version 3.2 goes back a long way. > > Another program where I have experienced problems is eselect, which is > > another bash script. Again there was a syntax fault. > > > > I will have to look into this a little better in the morning and maybe > > file a bug report. > > FWIW, here (and see below for the Gentoo versions): > > GNU bash, version 4.0.28(2)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) > > That's current ~amd64 as of yesterday's sync. > > I haven't run python-updater in some time but it ran fine when I ran it > last. I do need to run it again since python-3.1 was just in yesterday's > updates, tho, and see what happens. > > Meanwhile, I've had exactly zero problems with eselect, but I don't use > that many modules of it as I manage a lot of what it does, like the > kernel symlink, the make.profile symlink, etc, manually. > > Here's my bash, python and python-updater versions: > > $equery l bash python > * Searching for bash ... > [IP-] [ ~] app-shells/bash-4.0_p28 (0) > > * Searching for python ... > [IP-] [ ~] dev-lang/python-2.6.2-r1 (2.6) > [IP-] [ ~] dev-lang/python-3.1 (3.1) > > * Searching for python-updater ... > [IP-] [ ~] app-admin/python-updater-0.7 (0) > $ > > Are you full ~amd64, or did you package.keyword bash? If you're running > a mixed ~arch/stable system, it's possible that's the problem, tho it > doesn't look like it should be python-updater itself, since 0.7 is the > highest available for both stable and ~arch. > > Here's a depth-2 depends graph for the 4.0 p28 bash version: > > $equery g --depth=2 bash-4.0_p28 > * Searching for bash ... > * dependency graph for app-shells/bash-4.0_p28: > `-- app-shells/bash-4.0_p28 > `-- sys-libs/ncurses-5.7-r1 > `-- sys-libs/gpm-1.20.6 [gpm] > `-- sec-policy/selinux-gpm (unable to resolve: package masked or > removed) > `-- virtual/libintl-0 (virtual/libintl) [nls] > `-- sys-devel/gettext-0.17 [elibc_FreeBSD] > [ app-shells/bash-4.0_p28 stats: packages (5), max depth (2) ] > $ > > python-updater itself doesn't seem to have any significant dependencies, > just a package manager (portage, pkgcore or paludis), at the first level. > it's mixed. only select few packages installed ~x86 and their required deps. i would, personally, never go full blown ~x86 due to core packages needing to be stable.