OK.. I'm getting out of ideias. Now I've got the same error with a different file.. # chroot (...) # emerge portage [...] Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/bin/emerge", line 3200, in ? mydepgraph.merge(mydepgraph.altlist()) File "/usr/bin/emerge", line 1912, in merge retval=portage.doebuild(y,"merge",myroot,self.pkgsettings,edebug) File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage.py", line 2724, in doebuild return merge(mysettings["CATEGORY"],mysettings["PF"],mysettings["D"],mysettings["BUILDDIR"]+"/build-info",myroot,mysettings,myebuild=mysettings["EBUILD"]) File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage.py", line 2896, in merge return mylink.merge(pkgloc,infloc,myroot,myebuild) File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage.py", line 6893, in merge return self.treewalk(mergeroot,myroot,inforoot,myebuild,cleanup=cleanup) File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage.py", line 6502, in treewalk if self.mergeme (srcroot,destroot,outfile,secondhand,"",cfgfiledict,mymtime): File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage.py", line 6758, in mergeme if self.mergeme (srcroot,destroot,outfile,secondhand,offset+x+"/",cfgfiledict,thismtime): File "/usr/lib/portage/pym/portage.py", line 6791, in mergeme os.utime(mydest,(thismtime,thismtime)) OSError: [Errno 38] Function not implemented: '/etc/make.globals' On 12/29/05, Brian Harring wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 10:35:12AM +0000, Joăo Brázio wrote: > > On 12/29/05, Brian Harring <[1]ferringb@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 10:24:06AM +0000, Jo?o Br?zio wrote: > > > > Wel.. I've already tryed to chroot() into the grp-x86-20051228 and > > > > issued: > > > > # emerge portage > > > > Calculating dependencies > > > > > > > > !!! Problem in sys-apps/portage dependencies. > > > > !!! [Errno 38] Function not implemented: > > > > '/var/cache/edb/dep//usr/portage/sys-apps/.update.23778.portaege- > 2.0.53 > > > > ' exceptions > > > utime or rename offhand... > > Excuse me but what do you mean with "offhand" ? > > That name for a file is only created with a flat_list cache backend, > specifically when it's doing an update to an existing entry (kind of a > duh there considering the name, I know). > > The algo is roughly > f=open(tmp_update_entry) > write to it > close it > utime it (reset mtime) > rename(tmp_update_entry, update_entry) > > Hence the 'offhand'. Don't know if it's rename or utime that's not > defined- just know that those are the only two syscalls that could > sanely trigger that (failed update will trigger an unlink, but I'd be > amazed if that call was missing). > > ~harring > > > -- Cumprimentos, Joăo Brázio.