[gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Dave Nebinger]

Okay, I finished an "emerge --update --deep world" this morning.  Everything 
was cool.

This afternoon, however, I decide I want to install eclipse to migrate a 
windows java development effort to my gentoo box.

Did an "emerge --pretend dev-util/eclipse-sdk" to see what I was going to get.

I was surprised to see it wanting to emerge ant-core because I thought I 
already had it in place, so a quick eix call results in:

dnebinger@butthead ~ $ eix ant-core
Search results: 1
* dev-java/ant-core
     Available versions:  1.5.4-r2 1.6.2-r5 ~1.6.5-r2
     Installed:           1.6.2
     Homepage:            http://ant.apache.org/
     Description:         Java-based build tool similar to 'make' that uses 
XML configuration files.

So obviously it is in there, in my world file and everything.

The question is, shouldn't portage have updated to the latest -r5 ebuild as a 
result of the "--update --deep world" update previously?
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Zac Medico]

Dave Nebinger wrote:
> Okay, I finished an "emerge --update --deep world" this morning.  Everything 
> was cool.
> 
> This afternoon, however, I decide I want to install eclipse to migrate a 
> windows java development effort to my gentoo box.
> 
> Did an "emerge --pretend dev-util/eclipse-sdk" to see what I was going to get.
> 
> I was surprised to see it wanting to emerge ant-core because I thought I 
> already had it in place, so a quick eix call results in:
> 
> dnebinger@butthead ~ $ eix ant-core
> Search results: 1
> * dev-java/ant-core
>      Available versions:  1.5.4-r2 1.6.2-r5 ~1.6.5-r2
>      Installed:           1.6.2
>      Homepage:            http://ant.apache.org/
>      Description:         Java-based build tool similar to 'make' that uses 
> XML configuration files.
> 
> So obviously it is in there, in my world file and everything.
> 
> The question is, shouldn't portage have updated to the latest -r5 ebuild as a 
> result of the "--update --deep world" update previously?

The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or deep) of your "world" list.  One way to verify is with "emerge -a depclean".  If you want to keep any of the depclean packages then you should add some to /var/lib/portage/world.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Dave Nebinger]

On Sunday 02 October 2005 07:03 pm, Zac Medico wrote:
> The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or
> deep) of your "world" list.

Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in 
place as a result of a direct emerge.

Eix and emerge both knew it was installed and that it needed to be updated at 
the point when I was going to emerge eclipse.

So I don't think that answer covers it...

> One way to verify is with "emerge -a 
> depclean".  If you want to keep any of the depclean packages then you
> should add some to /var/lib/portage/world.

I haven't played with depclean so I'm going to have to look into that.

So far I've taken the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" path in regards to the 
portage subsystem.  Up until this incident I didn't think it was broke.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Mike Williams]

On Monday 03 October 2005 00:49, Dave Nebinger wrote:
> > The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or
> > deep) of your "world" list.
>
> Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in
> place as a result of a direct emerge.

At some point, yes. Doesn't mean it is so now.

> Eix and emerge both knew it was installed and that it needed to be updated
> at the point when I was going to emerge eclipse.
>
> So I don't think that answer covers it...

Is the eix database upto date? Are you really sure ant-core is actually 
installed? You said "it wanting to emerge ant-core", that suggests to me that 
ant-core isn't installed, unless you meant "it wanting to upgrade/update 
ant-core".

> > One way to verify is with "emerge -a
> > depclean".  If you want to keep any of the depclean packages then you
> > should add some to /var/lib/portage/world.
>
> I haven't played with depclean so I'm going to have to look into that.
>
> So far I've taken the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" path in regards to
> the portage subsystem.  Up until this incident I didn't think it was broke.

Depcleans function is to clean, to remove packages that it believes are no 
longer needed, i.e. packages pulled in as dependencies to packages that have 
since been removed, or packages pulled is as compile time only dependencies. 
It's not a tool to "fix" anything.

-- 
Mike Williams

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Nick Rout]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 19:49:23 -0400
Dave Nebinger wrote:

> On Sunday 02 October 2005 07:03 pm, Zac Medico wrote:
> > The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or
> > deep) of your "world" list.
> 
> Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in 
> place as a result of a direct emerge.

It may have been a dependency of something you have since unmerged.
Or it may have been a dependency of something that no longer has it as a dependency.

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Dave Nebinger]

On Sunday 02 October 2005 08:25 pm, Mike Williams wrote:
> On Monday 03 October 2005 00:49, Dave Nebinger wrote:
> > > The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or
> > > deep) of your "world" list.
> >
> > Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in
> > place as a result of a direct emerge.
>
> At some point, yes. Doesn't mean it is so now.

Well I should have qualified it by saying that I don't clean out packages; 
when I install something it is because I want to try it out and/or use it.  
When I stop using the package, it still stays installed.

So the dependency should still exist and be valid.

> > Eix and emerge both knew it was installed and that it needed to be
> > updated at the point when I was going to emerge eclipse.
> >
> > So I don't think that answer covers it...
>
> Is the eix database upto date? Are you really sure ant-core is actually
> installed? You said "it wanting to emerge ant-core", that suggests to me
> that ant-core isn't installed, unless you meant "it wanting to
> upgrade/update ant-core".

Eix is updated every night after the emerge --sync completes.  You'll have to 
go back to the original post but eix (as well as emerge --search but I didn't 
include that output) shows that ant-core is installed.

The emerge --pretend did report that mozilla and eclipse were new, but 
ant-core was an update.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Why would portage not update a package?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 736 bytes --]

On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 21:05:36 -0400, Dave Nebinger wrote:

> > > Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere
> > > or in place as a result of a direct emerge.
> >
> > At some point, yes. Doesn't mean it is so now.
> 
> Well I should have qualified it by saying that I don't clean out
> packages; when I install something it is because I want to try it out
> and/or use it. When I stop using the package, it still stays installed.

Even if it blocks something else you want to try? You don't always have
the option of leaving unused packages lying around, sometimes you have to
uninstall them to install something else.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?

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