[gentoo-user] merge-usr and SPF implementations

[gentoo-user] merge-usr and SPF implementations

[Stefan Schmiedl]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1176 bytes --]

Greetings.

After updating profiles, I decided to try switching to merged-user, too,
following the wiki page at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Merge-usr

One server reported during the dry run:
ERROR: Conflict for file '/usr/sbin/spfd': [Errno 17] File exists: 
'/usr/bin/spfd'

# equery belongs /usr/bin/spfd
  * Searching for /usr/bin/spfd ...
mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.11 (/usr/bin/spfd)
# equery belongs /usr/sbin/spfd
  * Searching for /usr/sbin/spfd ...
dev-perl/Mail-SPF-2.9.0-r3 (/usr/sbin/spfd)

That does put me in a bit of a pickle, as both are active dependencies
pulled in by essential software:

# emerge -cav Mail-SPF

Calculating dependencies  ... done!
   dev-perl/Mail-SPF-2.9.0-r3 pulled in by:
     mail-filter/spamassassin-4.0.0-r4 requires dev-perl/Mail-SPF

 >>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
# emerge -cav libspf2

Calculating dependencies... done!
   mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.11 pulled in by:
     mail-filter/opendmarc-1.4.1.1-r5 requires mail-filter/libspf2
     mail-mta/exim-4.97.1-r5 requires >=mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.5-r1


What is the recommended way to proceed in this scenario?

Regards,
Stefan

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2710 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] merge-usr and SPF implementations

[Michael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1583 bytes --]

On Friday, 29 March 2024 16:05:29 GMT Stefan Schmiedl wrote:
> Greetings.
> 
> After updating profiles, I decided to try switching to merged-user, too,
> following the wiki page at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Merge-usr
> 
> One server reported during the dry run:
> ERROR: Conflict for file '/usr/sbin/spfd': [Errno 17] File exists:
> '/usr/bin/spfd'
> 
> # equery belongs /usr/bin/spfd
>   * Searching for /usr/bin/spfd ...
> mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.11 (/usr/bin/spfd)
> # equery belongs /usr/sbin/spfd
>   * Searching for /usr/sbin/spfd ...
> dev-perl/Mail-SPF-2.9.0-r3 (/usr/sbin/spfd)
> 
> That does put me in a bit of a pickle, as both are active dependencies
> pulled in by essential software:
> 
> # emerge -cav Mail-SPF
> 
> Calculating dependencies  ... done!
>    dev-perl/Mail-SPF-2.9.0-r3 pulled in by:
>      mail-filter/spamassassin-4.0.0-r4 requires dev-perl/Mail-SPF
> 
>  >>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
> 
> # emerge -cav libspf2
> 
> Calculating dependencies... done!
>    mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.11 pulled in by:
>      mail-filter/opendmarc-1.4.1.1-r5 requires mail-filter/libspf2
>      mail-mta/exim-4.97.1-r5 requires >=mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.5-r1
> 
> 
> What is the recommended way to proceed in this scenario?
> 
> Regards,
> Stefan

My guess and this is only a guess, is the two binaries are in separate 
subdirectories of /usr and therefore there shouldn't be a problem.  Before you 
progress with this you could raise a bug, or try to seek a dev's advice on 
IRC.  A fresh backup before you make any changes is definitely a good idea.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re[2]: [gentoo-user] merge-usr and SPF implementations

[Stefan Schmiedl]

Michael wrote on Friday, 29. März 2024 18:53:
 
> On Friday, 29 March 2024 16:05:29 GMT Stefan Schmiedl wrote:
>> Greetings.
>> After updating profiles, I decided to try switching to merged-user, too,
>> following the wiki page at https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Merge-usr
>> One server reported during the dry run:
>> ERROR: Conflict for file '/usr/sbin/spfd': [Errno 17] File exists:
>> '/usr/bin/spfd'
>> # equery belongs /usr/bin/spfd
>>   * Searching for /usr/bin/spfd ...
>> mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.11 (/usr/bin/spfd)
>> # equery belongs /usr/sbin/spfd
>>   * Searching for /usr/sbin/spfd ...
>> dev-perl/Mail-SPF-2.9.0-r3 (/usr/sbin/spfd)
>> That does put me in a bit of a pickle, as both are active dependencies
>> pulled in by essential software:
>> # emerge -cav Mail-SPF
>> Calculating dependencies  ... done!
>>    dev-perl/Mail-SPF-2.9.0-r3 pulled in by:
>>      mail-filter/spamassassin-4.0.0-r4 requires dev-perl/Mail-SPF
 >>>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
>> # emerge -cav libspf2
>> Calculating dependencies... done!
>>    mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.11 pulled in by:
>>      mail-filter/opendmarc-1.4.1.1-r5 requires mail-filter/libspf2
>>      mail-mta/exim-4.97.1-r5 requires >=mail-filter/libspf2-1.2.5-r1
>> What is the recommended way to proceed in this scenario?
>> Regards,
>> Stefan

> My guess and this is only a guess, is the two binaries are in separate 
> subdirectories of /usr and therefore there shouldn't be a problem.  Before you 
> progress with this you could raise a bug, or try to seek a dev's advice on 
> IRC.  A fresh backup before you make any changes is definitely a good idea.

Quoting the wiki page:
"In addition, the script applies the "sbin merge" at the same time where /sbin and /usr/sbin are both actually merged to /usr/bin."
So while it is not a problem with split-usr, those two packages will clash with merged-usr.

https://bugs.gentoo.org/928140

Thanks,
s.

Re: [gentoo-user] merge-usr and SPF implementations

[Michael]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1541 bytes --]

On Friday, 29 March 2024 19:06:45 GMT Stefan Schmiedl wrote:
>  
> 
> Michael wrote on Friday, 29. März 2024 18:53:

> > My guess and this is only a guess, is the two binaries are in separate 
> > subdirectories of /usr and therefore there shouldn't be a problem.  Before
> > you  progress with this you could raise a bug, or try to seek a dev's
> > advice on IRC.  A fresh backup before you make any changes is definitely
> > a good idea.
> Quoting the wiki page:
> "In addition, the script applies the "sbin merge" at the same time
> where /sbin and /usr/sbin are both actually merged to /usr/bin." So while
> it is not a problem with split-usr, those two packages will clash with
> merged-usr.

You're right, they will be in the same subdirectory!

~ $ ls -la /usr
total 390
drwxr-xr-x  11 root root   3452 Mar 24 08:52 .
drwxr-xr-x  16 root root   4096 Mar 26 15:43 ..
drwxr-xr-x   3 root root 118784 Mar 29 16:09 bin
drwxr-xr-x 369 root root  53248 Mar 29 13:58 include
drwxr-xr-x  34 root root   4096 Mar 24 08:57 lib
drwxr-xr-x  88 root root 249856 Mar 29 13:58 lib64
drwxr-xr-x  17 root root   3452 Mar 29 16:09 libexec
drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   3452 Jul 23  2023 local
lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root      3 Mar 24 08:52 sbin -> bin
drwxr-xr-x 272 root root   8192 Mar 29 13:58 share
drwxr-xr-x   3 root root   3452 Mar 19 15:25 src
drwxr-xr-x   6 root root   3452 Jul 23  2023 x86_64-pc-linux-gnu


> https://bugs.gentoo.org/928140
> 
> Thanks,
> s.

The bug report should hopefully resolve these.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]