[gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Willie Wong]

Hi list, 

I ran 'eclean-dist' last night (with no additional arguments) to clean
out /usr/portage/distfiles. And it generated a bit of interesting
output that I haven't seen before:

   The folowing Deprecated installed packages were found
             media-libs/libpng-1.2.43-r1
             dev-python/reportlab-2.3-r1
             app-i18n/gcin-1.4.7_pre17
             sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r9
             dev-perl/URI-1.53
             dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.22

I don't see anything about this feature in 'man eclean'; does anyone know 
what this is all about?

Cheers, 

W
-- 
Willie W. Wong                                     wwong@math.princeton.edu
Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire 
         et vice versa   ~~~  I. Newton

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Alan McKinnon]

On Thursday 20 May 2010 06:34:37 Willie Wong wrote:
> Hi list,
> 
> I ran 'eclean-dist' last night (with no additional arguments) to clean
> out /usr/portage/distfiles. And it generated a bit of interesting
> output that I haven't seen before:
> 
>    The folowing Deprecated installed packages were found
>              media-libs/libpng-1.2.43-r1
>              dev-python/reportlab-2.3-r1
>              app-i18n/gcin-1.4.7_pre17
>              sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r9
>              dev-perl/URI-1.53
>              dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.22
> 
> I don't see anything about this feature in 'man eclean'; does anyone know
> what this is all about?


It means those package version are deprecated and you are encouraged to 
upgrade them.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Willie Wong]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 07:38:43AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Thursday 20 May 2010 06:34:37 Willie Wong wrote:
> > Hi list,
> > 
> > I ran 'eclean-dist' last night (with no additional arguments) to clean
> > out /usr/portage/distfiles. And it generated a bit of interesting
> > output that I haven't seen before:
> > 
> >    The folowing Deprecated installed packages were found
> >              media-libs/libpng-1.2.43-r1
> >              dev-python/reportlab-2.3-r1
> >              app-i18n/gcin-1.4.7_pre17
> >              sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r9
> >              dev-perl/URI-1.53
> >              dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.22
> > 
> > I don't see anything about this feature in 'man eclean'; does anyone know
> > what this is all about?
> 
> It means those package version are deprecated and you are encouraged to 
> upgrade them.
> 

Ah... I see, I was trying to figure out what they meant by deprecated
and how they determined it. It seems that the only thing common to
those packages is that their ebuilds are no-longer in the tree. 

So I guess I'm not going to worry too much about it: if they haven't
gotten updated regularly that probably means they are either bdeps or
that they will be depcleaned the next time I do it.

Cheers, 

W

-- 
Willie W. Wong                                     wwong@math.princeton.edu
Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire 
         et vice versa   ~~~  I. Newton

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Alan McKinnon]

On Thursday 20 May 2010 10:05:57 Willie Wong wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 07:38:43AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 May 2010 06:34:37 Willie Wong wrote:
> > > Hi list,
> > > 
> > > I ran 'eclean-dist' last night (with no additional arguments) to clean
> > > out /usr/portage/distfiles. And it generated a bit of interesting
> > > 
> > > output that I haven't seen before:
> > >    The folowing Deprecated installed packages were found
> > >    
> > >              media-libs/libpng-1.2.43-r1
> > >              dev-python/reportlab-2.3-r1
> > >              app-i18n/gcin-1.4.7_pre17
> > >              sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r9
> > >              dev-perl/URI-1.53
> > >              dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.22
> > > 
> > > I don't see anything about this feature in 'man eclean'; does anyone
> > > know what this is all about?
> > 
> > It means those package version are deprecated and you are encouraged to
> > upgrade them.
> 
> Ah... I see, I was trying to figure out what they meant by deprecated
> and how they determined it. It seems that the only thing common to
> those packages is that their ebuilds are no-longer in the tree.
> 
> So I guess I'm not going to worry too much about it: if they haven't
> gotten updated regularly that probably means they are either bdeps or
> that they will be depcleaned the next time I do it.

This word "deprecated" confuses tons of people. I don't know if it does that 
to you or not, but lots of other people read this list, so for their benefit 
here goes.

"deprecated" means "this package has been superceded by something else and 
although it is still available and works, you are encouraged to stop using it 
and upgrade". The intent is that eventually a deprecated package will go away.

The root word it derives from basically means "to make smaller or less 
important". It's not the same thing as "depreciate" or "removed" or "obsolete" 
or "disappeared".

Each one of those packages you list has more up to date versions available in 
the tree.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Willie Wong]

On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:20:54AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Ah... I see, I was trying to figure out what they meant by deprecated
> > and how they determined it. It seems that the only thing common to
> > those packages is that their ebuilds are no-longer in the tree.

> Each one of those packages you list has more up to date versions available in 
> the tree.

Precisely. But the exact version that is installed is no longer in
the tree. Seeing that I don't recall the portage system introducing a
deprecated flag (short of the removal notice and package.mask), I was
curious how eclean determined that those packages are deprecated. 

And also seeing that for many of the ones I listed, neither
  emerge --update --deep world
nor
  emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y world
suggest their updates, in my case they are probably just cruft that
ought to go away once the system is brought up to date and I can run
depclean. 

But am I wrong in my impression that with bdeps, the common thing to
do is to update them only when absolutely necessary? So in this case
the deprecation warning might introduce unnecessary cycles spent on
building those packages (among those who don't want to track down the
origins of those packages and just want the block of text to go away).

Cheers, 

W
-- 
Willie W. Wong                                     wwong@math.princeton.edu
Data aequatione quotcunque fluentes quantitae involvente fluxiones invenire 
         et vice versa   ~~~  I. Newton

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Alan McKinnon]

On Thursday 20 May 2010 11:36:46 Willie Wong wrote:
> On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:20:54AM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > Ah... I see, I was trying to figure out what they meant by deprecated
> > > and how they determined it. It seems that the only thing common to
> > > those packages is that their ebuilds are no-longer in the tree.
> > 
> > Each one of those packages you list has more up to date versions
> > available in the tree.
> 
> Precisely. But the exact version that is installed is no longer in
> the tree. Seeing that I don't recall the portage system introducing a
> deprecated flag (short of the removal notice and package.mask), I was
> curious how eclean determined that those packages are deprecated.
> 
> And also seeing that for many of the ones I listed, neither
>   emerge --update --deep world
> nor
>   emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y world
> suggest their updates, in my case they are probably just cruft that
> ought to go away once the system is brought up to date and I can run
> depclean.

I remember something about a "deprecated" feature somewhere.
Can't remember where now, and grep doesn't reveal it...

> 
> But am I wrong in my impression that with bdeps, the common thing to
> do is to update them only when absolutely necessary? So in this case
> the deprecation warning might introduce unnecessary cycles spent on
> building those packages (among those who don't want to track down the
> origins of those packages and just want the block of text to go away).

Yes, that's pretty much true.

bdeps are are deps that are only used to build stuff, not run them. So portage 
will only update them when it needs to build something using them.

You can use bdeps=y in make.conf but most folks just leave it at the sensible 
default.



-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 20 May 2010 09:20:54 Alan McKinnon wrote:

> The root word it derives from basically means "to make smaller or
> less important".

Actually, in the Mother Tongue, it means "to express disapproval of" (I 
quote an Oxford English dictionary).

> It's not the same thing as "depreciate" or "removed" or "obsolete" or
> "disappeared".

Indeed, that is most certainly true.

-- 
Rgds
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 532 bytes --]

On Thu, 20 May 2010 14:07:49 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > The root word it derives from basically means "to make smaller or
> > less important".  
> 
> Actually, in the Mother Tongue, it means "to express disapproval of" (I 
> quote an Oxford English dictionary).

You quote one of the three definitions in the OED. The second is "plead
earnestly against", which applies here. The third is "pray against" which
applies just before removal fro the tree :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

668 - The neighbour of the beast.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 20 May 2010 15:46:50 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 20 May 2010 14:07:49 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> > > The root word it derives from basically means "to make smaller or
> > > less important".
> > 
> > Actually, in the Mother Tongue, it means "to express disapproval
> > of" (I quote an Oxford English dictionary).
> 
> You quote one of the three definitions in the OED. The second is
> "plead earnestly against", which applies here. The third is "pray
> against" which applies just before removal fro the tree :)

I don't have access to the OED; only to a NODE*, which gives only the 
definition I quoted. I assume from that that the other two are minor 
usages. And I still think "express disapproval of" is the meaning here.

* New Oxford Dictionary of English, which I have seen severe criticisms 
of.

-- 
Rgds
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Deprecated installed packages

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 739 bytes --]

On Fri, 21 May 2010 13:44:02 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> > You quote one of the three definitions in the OED. The second is
> > "plead earnestly against", which applies here. The third is "pray
> > against" which applies just before removal fro the tree :)  
> 
> I don't have access to the OED; only to a NODE*, which gives only the 

An OED is very useful for claiming the moral high ground in English usage
arguments :)

> definition I quoted. I assume from that that the other two are minor 
> usages. And I still think "express disapproval of" is the meaning here.

I don't think any of them really fit, you could force 1 but equally 2.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Blessed be the pessimist for he hath made backups.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]