Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[MAL]

Nick Jones wrote:
> Ok. Portage-2.0.47-r1 is ready for testing. It's got a lot of new
> stuff in it along with a good deal of fixes. Should be 'wicked-fast'
> as it has a lot of updates to caching code and the like. It is masked
> in package.mask. I need testers AND feedback. Gimme a holler with
> bugs and good/bad comments. Here or on bugs.gentoo.org is fine.

Ok, very odd problems..

Just tried to emerge xpm, and I get:

 >>> Unpacking source...
 >>> Unpacking xpm-3.4k.tar.gz to /var/tmp/portage/xpm-3.4k-r1/work
 >>> Source unpacked.
imake -DUseInstalled -I/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/config
/usr/bin/cpp: line 1: /usr/sbin/gcc-config: No such file or directory
/usr/bin/cpp: line 1: /usr/sbin/gcc-config: No such file or directory
/usr/bin/cpp: line 1: /usr/sbin/gcc-config: No such file or directory
etc... for several thousand lines, until ...
/usr/bin/cpp: cannot make pipe for command substitution: Too many open 
files in system

and then it fails.

So I look for the elusive /usr/sbin/gcc-config, and lo and behold it's 
missing?!  I ran it a few days ago!

So, promptly onto emerge gcc-config, which appears to emerge 
successfully, but produces the following messages:

  * Adding compat symlinks...
/usr/lib/portage/bin/newbin: line 13: dobin: command not found
/usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 6: prepallman: command not found
/usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 7: prepallinfo: command not found
/usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 8: prepallstrip: command not found
 >>> Completed installing into /var/tmp/portage/gcc-config-1.3.1/image/

The build continues and completes... but.. gcc-config is not on the 
system?!  in either /usr/bin/gcc-config or /usr/sbin/gcc-config.
It looks like the build hasn't written any files out.

Originally I tried userpriv and usersandbox, but assuming these were 
causing this problem, I change my features line to just be the default, 
(nothing).  Same thing.

I just unmerged and remerged gcc-config, and the ebuild doesn't seem to 
be adding /usr/bin/gcc-config to the system.

This _could_ all be unrelated to portage, in which case it's 
coincidental with installing 2.0.47-r2.

Help :)
Cheers,
MAL


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Benjamin Podszun]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2755 bytes --]

Uhm.. Are you sure you didn't mess up something like rm -rf /usr ? ;)
Seriously: That gcc-config "disappears" is quite strange, but that
portage misses binaries is - evil. ;)

I installed 2.0.47-r2 as well on this laptop and I still have the
portage-binaries (dobin etc.) and gcc-config. I'd guess it's - uhm -
portage-unrelated.

Ben

On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 11:42, MAL wrote:
> Nick Jones wrote:
> > Ok. Portage-2.0.47-r1 is ready for testing. It's got a lot of new
> > stuff in it along with a good deal of fixes. Should be 'wicked-fast'
> > as it has a lot of updates to caching code and the like. It is masked
> > in package.mask. I need testers AND feedback. Gimme a holler with
> > bugs and good/bad comments. Here or on bugs.gentoo.org is fine.
> 
> Ok, very odd problems..
> 
> Just tried to emerge xpm, and I get:
> 
>  >>> Unpacking source...
>  >>> Unpacking xpm-3.4k.tar.gz to /var/tmp/portage/xpm-3.4k-r1/work
>  >>> Source unpacked.
> imake -DUseInstalled -I/usr/X11R6/lib/X11/config
> /usr/bin/cpp: line 1: /usr/sbin/gcc-config: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/cpp: line 1: /usr/sbin/gcc-config: No such file or directory
> /usr/bin/cpp: line 1: /usr/sbin/gcc-config: No such file or directory
> etc... for several thousand lines, until ...
> /usr/bin/cpp: cannot make pipe for command substitution: Too many open 
> files in system
> 
> and then it fails.
> 
> So I look for the elusive /usr/sbin/gcc-config, and lo and behold it's 
> missing?!  I ran it a few days ago!
> 
> So, promptly onto emerge gcc-config, which appears to emerge 
> successfully, but produces the following messages:
> 
>   * Adding compat symlinks...
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/newbin: line 13: dobin: command not found
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 6: prepallman: command not found
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 7: prepallinfo: command not found
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 8: prepallstrip: command not found
>  >>> Completed installing into /var/tmp/portage/gcc-config-1.3.1/image/
> 
> The build continues and completes... but.. gcc-config is not on the 
> system?!  in either /usr/bin/gcc-config or /usr/sbin/gcc-config.
> It looks like the build hasn't written any files out.
> 
> Originally I tried userpriv and usersandbox, but assuming these were 
> causing this problem, I change my features line to just be the default, 
> (nothing).  Same thing.
> 
> I just unmerged and remerged gcc-config, and the ebuild doesn't seem to 
> be adding /usr/bin/gcc-config to the system.
> 
> This _could_ all be unrelated to portage, in which case it's 
> coincidental with installing 2.0.47-r2.
> 
> Help :)
> Cheers,
> MAL
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[MAL]

Benjamin Podszun wrote:
> Uhm.. Are you sure you didn't mess up something like rm -rf /usr ? ;)
> Seriously: That gcc-config "disappears" is quite strange, but that
> portage misses binaries is - evil. ;)
> 
> I installed 2.0.47-r2 as well on this laptop and I still have the
> portage-binaries (dobin etc.) and gcc-config. I'd guess it's - uhm -
> portage-unrelated.
> 
> Ben

Nope, it's still intact, the system functions flawlessly otherwise... 
/usr isn't even a separate partition, (and no i'm not out of disk space ;)

/usr/lib/portage/bin/dobin etc _are_ there ! all of them, that's what's 
weirder.

I think the gcc-config ebuild is screwing up elsewhere internally.  By 
the looks of it, 1.3.1 creates a g++/gcc etc in /usr/bin.  I guess these 
are wrappers, or pointers to whatever current gcc is selected with 
gcc-config?
Can someone verify this?  I thought gcc was only meant to be selected 
via PATH.

MAL


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Terje Kvernes]

MAL <mal@komcept.com> writes:

  [ ... ]

> So I look for the elusive /usr/sbin/gcc-config, and lo and behold it's
> missing?!  I ran it a few days ago!
> 
> So, promptly onto emerge gcc-config, which appears to emerge
> successfully, but produces the following messages:
> 
>   * Adding compat symlinks...
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/newbin: line 13: dobin: command not found
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 6: prepallman: command not found
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 7: prepallinfo: command not found
> /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 8: prepallstrip: command not found
>  >>> Completed installing into /var/tmp/portage/gcc-config-1.3.1/image/
> 
> The build continues and completes... but.. gcc-config is not on the
> system?!  in either /usr/bin/gcc-config or /usr/sbin/gcc-config.
> It looks like the build hasn't written any files out.

  the same thing happens here.  reverting to portage 2.0.46-whatever
  fixed the problem.  this also made forkbombs on my box, since even
  restarting X uses the GCC preprocessor, which didn't quite do it's
  thing.  this is, for the record, a 1.2-based system.  I'll submit to
  bugzilla eventually, when it's not 4am.  :-)

  and yes, I've included MAL explicitly in the To:-header.

-- 
Terje

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Eric Andresen]

On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 19:56, Terje Kvernes wrote:
> MAL <mal@komcept.com> writes:
> 
>   [ ... ]
> 
> > So I look for the elusive /usr/sbin/gcc-config, and lo and behold it's
> > missing?!  I ran it a few days ago!
> > 
> > So, promptly onto emerge gcc-config, which appears to emerge
> > successfully, but produces the following messages:
> > 
> >   * Adding compat symlinks...
> > /usr/lib/portage/bin/newbin: line 13: dobin: command not found
> > /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 6: prepallman: command not found
> > /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 7: prepallinfo: command not found
> > /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepall: line 8: prepallstrip: command not found
> >  >>> Completed installing into /var/tmp/portage/gcc-config-1.3.1/image/
> > 
> > The build continues and completes... but.. gcc-config is not on the
> > system?!  in either /usr/bin/gcc-config or /usr/sbin/gcc-config.
> > It looks like the build hasn't written any files out.
> 
>   the same thing happens here.  reverting to portage 2.0.46-whatever
>   fixed the problem.  this also made forkbombs on my box, since even
>   restarting X uses the GCC preprocessor, which didn't quite do it's
>   thing.  this is, for the record, a 1.2-based system.  I'll submit to
>   bugzilla eventually, when it's not 4am.  :-)
> 
>   and yes, I've included MAL explicitly in the To:-header.

I'm willing to bet that the problem is caused by that particular
ebuild's changing of the PATH. Just a thought. ;)

-- 
--Eric Andresen
  ndiin@asu.edu


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[MAL]

Terje Kvernes wrote:
>   the same thing happens here.  reverting to portage 2.0.46-whatever
>   fixed the problem.  this also made forkbombs on my box, since even
>   restarting X uses the GCC preprocessor, which didn't quite do it's
>   thing.  this is, for the record, a 1.2-based system.  I'll submit to
>   bugzilla eventually, when it's not 4am.  :-)

For the record, i'm on a was-1.2 system that I upgraded to 1.4 with the 
update scripts and info here:
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/upgrade-to-gentoo-1.4.xml

A good chunk of my system is probably still linked against the old 
libraries, as I emerged the compat libs instead of doing an emerge -e world.

>   and yes, I've included MAL explicitly in the To:-header.

I'm touched.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[MAL]

Eric Andresen wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 19:56, Terje Kvernes wrote:
> I'm willing to bet that the problem is caused by that particular
> ebuild's changing of the PATH. Just a thought. ;)

I don't see how.. I have a few (>3) 1.4 systems that went through the 
upgrade fine, and looking at them, I can't see any difference in the 
PATH settings, between them and my updated-1.2 system.

MAL


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[MAL]

MAL wrote:
> Terje Kvernes wrote:
> 
>>   the same thing happens here.  reverting to portage 2.0.46-whatever
>>   fixed the problem.  this also made forkbombs on my box, since even
>>   restarting X uses the GCC preprocessor, which didn't quite do it's
>>   thing.  this is, for the record, a 1.2-based system.  I'll submit to
>>   bugzilla eventually, when it's not 4am.  :-)
> 
> For the record, i'm on a was-1.2 system that I upgraded to 1.4 with the 
> update scripts and info here:
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/upgrade-to-gentoo-1.4.xml
> 
> A good chunk of my system is probably still linked against the old 
> libraries, as I emerged the compat libs instead of doing an emerge -e 
> world.

Sorry about replying to my own post, but for the record, downgrading 
portage to 2.0.46-r12 allowed me to emerge gcc-config successfully and 
then emerge xpm fine.

Please could someone explain why this happened?  Don't want to be stuck 
on a version of portage forever :/

Cheers,
MAL


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Terje Kvernes]

MAL <mal@komcept.com> writes:

  [ ... ]

> Sorry about replying to my own post, but for the record, downgrading
> portage to 2.0.46-r12 allowed me to emerge gcc-config successfully
> and then emerge xpm fine.

  gaaah.  my apologies, I reported the bug and the same "fix" but
  forgot to include that information.  I'll blame the time of night.

  <url: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16047 >
 
> Please could someone explain why this happened?  Don't want to be
> stuck on a version of portage forever :/

  I think upgrading to a newer portage will be "safe", but emerging
  gcc-config with the new portage won't be safe.  or something like
  that.  I'll test things once I eventually get a frigging
  RAID-cabinet working at work and eventually catch some sleep.

-- 
Terje

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Terje Kvernes]

MAL <mal@komcept.com> writes:

> Terje Kvernes wrote:
>
> > and yes, I've included MAL explicitly in the To:-header.
> 
> I'm touched.

  well, I wasn't sure you were on the list, and I wanted to make sure
  you knew you weren't alone.  sorry.  :-/

-- 
Terje

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Martin, Stephen]

Is 2.0.47-r2 *supposed* to be in stable?  I did an emerge -u world today and
it upgraded portage to 47.  I too am now having all kinds of problems with
gcc-config.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[MAL]

Martin, Stephen wrote:
> Is 2.0.47-r2 *supposed* to be in stable?  I did an emerge -u world today and
> it upgraded portage to 47.  I too am now having all kinds of problems with
> gcc-config.
> 

Supposedly yes :/

I'm sticking with 2.0.46 until someone states what the cause is.

Is, or was, your system, gentoo 1.2 ?

MAL


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Martin, Stephen]

I believe the system was 1.4_rc1.



-----Original Message-----
From: MAL [mailto:mal@komcept.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 9:36 AM
To: Martin, Stephen
Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

Martin, Stephen wrote:
> Is 2.0.47-r2 *supposed* to be in stable?  I did an emerge -u world today
and
> it upgraded portage to 47.  I too am now having all kinds of problems with
> gcc-config.
> 

Supposedly yes :/

I'm sticking with 2.0.46 until someone states what the cause is.

Is, or was, your system, gentoo 1.2 ?

MAL


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Martin, Stephen]

OK, my bad.  It doesn't necessarily seem to be a portage problem on my end.
I downgraded to 2.0.46 and I'm still having problems.  I think it might be a
problem with the specific packages I'm trying to emerge.  When trying to
emerge php-4.3.1 I get a message saying that fork() isn't supported on my
platform.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Eric Andresen]

I was refering to lines 22 through 31 of gcc-config-1.3.1.ebuild (and
similar for other gcc-config ebuilds). My guess is the changing of the
way that portage handled things made this method no longer work.

On Thu, 2003-02-20 at 03:20, MAL wrote:
> Eric Andresen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 19:56, Terje Kvernes wrote:
> > I'm willing to bet that the problem is caused by that particular
> > ebuild's changing of the PATH. Just a thought. ;)
> 
> I don't see how.. I have a few (>3) 1.4 systems that went through the 
> upgrade fine, and looking at them, I can't see any difference in the 
> PATH settings, between them and my updated-1.2 system.
> 
> MAL
-- 
--Eric Andresen
  ndiin@asu.edu


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage-2.0.47-r2 testing

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 537 bytes --]

On Thursday 20 February 2003 18:06, Martin, Stephen wrote:
> OK, my bad.  It doesn't necessarily seem to be a portage problem on my end.
> I downgraded to 2.0.46 and I'm still having problems.  I think it might be
> a problem with the specific packages I'm trying to emerge.  When trying to
> emerge php-4.3.1 I get a message saying that fork() isn't supported on my
> platform.
>

php aparently doesn't like jdk's before 1.4

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Researcher
Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]