[gentoo-user] gcc upgrade

[gentoo-user] gcc upgrade

[Valmor de Almeida]

Hello,

I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
the newer version

-> gcc-config -l
 [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
 [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *

and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with

 emerge -e system
 emerge -e world

assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
unmerge version 4.3.4?

Thanks,

--
Valmor

[gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
> the newer version
>
> ->  gcc-config -l
>   [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
>   [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
>
> and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
>
>   emerge -e system
>   emerge -e world
>
> assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
> unmerge version 4.3.4?

There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Mark Knecht]

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>
>> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
>>> the newer version
>>>
>>> ->  gcc-config -l
>>>  [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
>>>  [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
>>>
>>> and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
>>>
>>>  emerge -e system
>>>  emerge -e world
>>>
>>> assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
>>> unmerge version 4.3.4?
>>
>> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.
>>
>
> Or he doesn't like cruft or needs the drive space.
>
> Is rebuilding the whole system needed for that upgrade tho?
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>

Not needed but I'm doing it.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>      
>>> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>>>        
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
>>>> the newer version
>>>>
>>>> ->    gcc-config -l
>>>>   [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
>>>>   [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
>>>>
>>>> and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
>>>>
>>>>   emerge -e system
>>>>   emerge -e world
>>>>
>>>> assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
>>>> unmerge version 4.3.4?
>>>>          
>>> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.
>>>
>>>        
>> Or he doesn't like cruft or needs the drive space.
>>
>> Is rebuilding the whole system needed for that upgrade tho?
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
>>
>>
>>      
> Not needed but I'm doing it.
>
> - Mark
>
>    

I'm not going to tell you not to.  I usually do at least a emerge -e 
system myself.  I at least want to make certain I can boot up.  I'm not 
fond of doing the chroot thing.  :/

Hope everything compiles fine.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Mark Knecht]

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
>>>>> the newer version
>>>>>
>>>>> ->    gcc-config -l
>>>>>  [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
>>>>>  [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
>>>>>
>>>>> and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
>>>>>
>>>>>  emerge -e system
>>>>>  emerge -e world
>>>>>
>>>>> assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
>>>>> unmerge version 4.3.4?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or he doesn't like cruft or needs the drive space.
>>>
>>> Is rebuilding the whole system needed for that upgrade tho?
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> :-)  :-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not needed but I'm doing it.
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>>
>
> I'm not going to tell you not to.  I usually do at least a emerge -e system
> myself.  I at least want to make certain I can boot up.  I'm not fond of
> doing the chroot thing.  :/
>
> Hope everything compiles fine.
>
> Dale

I got tired of dealing with my libpng problem by hand. I kicked off an
emerge -e @world in hopes that I'll just come back in a few hours to a
fixed up system.

We'll see....

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Valmor de Almeida]

Dale wrote:
[snip]
> 
> Is rebuilding the whole system needed for that upgrade tho?
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)
> 

Thought it would be a good idea to have a consistent system; not sure
whether it is necessary.

Thanks for the replies.

--
Valmor

[gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[walt]

On 07/09/2010 07:45 PM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
> Dale wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> Is rebuilding the whole system needed for that upgrade tho?
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
>>
> 
> Thought it would be a good idea to have a consistent system; not sure
> whether it is necessary.
> 
> Thanks for the replies.

The only real need to re-emerge packages is if the new gcc version updates
your version of libstdc++, because that lib is supplied by each new version
of the gcc package:

$ls -l /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libstdc++*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2237388 2010-06-06 13:16 /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libstdc++.a
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      19 2010-06-06 13:17 /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libstdc++.so -> libstdc++.so.6.0.13*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      19 2010-06-06 13:17 /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libstdc++.so.6 -> libstdc++.so.6.0.13*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  954472 2010-06-06 13:16 /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libstdc++.so.6.0.13*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2384572 2010-06-06 13:16 /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libstdc++_pic.a

The only packages on your machine that would be affected by the gcc update are those
packages that are linked against the OLD version of libstdc++.so.  Running revdep-rebuild
should rebuild/reinstall all of those packages.  Theoretically speaking, of course :)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 673 bytes --]

On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 20:02:23 -0500, Dale wrote:

> >> assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
> >> unmerge version 4.3.4?  
> >
> > There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.
> >  
> 
> Or he doesn't like cruft or needs the drive space.
> 
> Is rebuilding the whole system needed for that upgrade tho?

Only if you want to remove the old version, if only to ensure that
everything builds with 4.4. Every time I remove 4.3, I find myself
re-emerging it because some odd package won't build with 4.4, so I ended
up leaving it there.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Last words of a Windows user: = Why does that work now?

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 10 July 2010 02:57:42 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
> > the newer version
> > 
> > ->  gcc-config -l
> > 
> >   [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
> >   [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
> > 
> > and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
> > 
> >   emerge -e system
> >   emerge -e world
> > 
> > assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
> > unmerge version 4.3.4?
> 
> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.

And why is the OP rebuilding world at all? There's no reason to do that 
either, there's no API/ABI break between 4.3.4 and 4.3.3

Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and 
put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Mark Knecht]

On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and
> put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...

Precisely... :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Mark Knecht]

On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and
>> put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...
>
> Precisely... :-)
>

Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
> morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
> Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.

Now we just need support for emerging fresh and hot coffee ;-)

BTW: regularily emerging world could be a fine testbed.
Maybe I'll set up an chroot or container for that on some 
idling boxes ...


cu
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt@metux.de
 mobile: +49 151 27565287  icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Valmor de Almeida]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <SNIP>
>>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and
>>> put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...
>> Precisely... :-)
>>
> 
> Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
> morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
> Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
> 
> - Mark
> 

Exactly. My Ferrari is back with a brand new engine and no libpng issue.

--
Valmor

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 14 July 2010 05:49:48 Valmor de Almeida wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
> >> wrote: <SNIP>
> >> 
> >>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for
> >>> kicks and put it all back together again so that not even the factory
> >>> can notice...
> >> 
> >> Precisely... :-)
> > 
> > Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
> > morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
> > Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
> > 
> > - Mark
> 
> Exactly. My Ferrari is back with a brand new engine and no libpng issue.


Lets follow this logic.

You blindly wanted to re-emerge all of world because an over-reaching gcc 
upgrade guide said so. Coincidentally, there was a monumental libpng cock-up 
hanging around which emerge -e world just happened to fix.

And this somehow validates the gcc upgrade guide?

You just happened to have a fortunate side-effect at the right time. Doesn't 
change the fact that the author of the guide wrote a misleading document.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

[gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Nuno J. Silva]

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wednesday 14 July 2010 05:49:48 Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>> Mark Knecht wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote: <SNIP>
>> >> 
>> >>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for
>> >>> kicks and put it all back together again so that not even the factory
>> >>> can notice...
>> >> 
>> >> Precisely... :-)
>> > 
>> > Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
>> > morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
>> > Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
>> > 
>> > - Mark
>> 
>> Exactly. My Ferrari is back with a brand new engine and no libpng issue.
>
>
> Lets follow this logic.
>
> You blindly wanted to re-emerge all of world because an over-reaching gcc 
> upgrade guide said so. Coincidentally, there was a monumental libpng cock-up 
> hanging around which emerge -e world just happened to fix.

And which could have been solved with revdep-rebuild (or at least
running it here after removing the previous version solved it - I just
followed flameeyes guide).

Emerge -e was like buying a new car when it would have been cheaper and
easier to just replace the fault part(s).

-- 
Nuno J. Silva
gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Valmor de Almeida]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <SNIP>
>>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and
>>> put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...
>> Precisely... :-)
>>
> 
> Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
> morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
> Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
> 
> - Mark
> 

One interesting thing on the new Ferrari. If I do

-> emerge --pretend --verbose --newuse --update --deep world

These are the packages that would be merged, in order:

Calculating dependencies... done!

Total: 0 packages, Size of downloads: 0 kB

However

-> emerge -evp world

[ebuild     U ] x11-proto/scrnsaverproto-1.2.0 [1.1.0] 49 kB [0]
[ebuild     U ] sys-devel/automake-1.10.3 [1.10.2] 936 kB [0]

Total: 536 packages (2 upgrades, 534 reinstalls), Size of downloads:
1,015 kB
Portage tree and overlays:
 [0] /usr/portage
 [1] /var/lib/layman/science

Where

-> revdep-rebuild --ignore --pretend --verbose

* Checking dynamic linking consistency
[ 100% ]

 * Dynamic linking on your system is consistent... All done.

and

-> emerge --depclean --pretend --verbose

>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
Packages installed:   538
Packages in world:    69
Packages in system:   50
Required packages:    538
Number to remove:     0

So emerge -evp is useful to get those last inconsistencies out of the
system.

--
Valmor

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Dale]

Valmor de Almeida wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
>    
>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht<markknecht@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>      
>>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon<alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> <SNIP>
>>>        
>>>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and
>>>> put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...
>>>>          
>>> Precisely... :-)
>>>
>>>        
>> Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
>> morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
>> Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>>      
> One interesting thing on the new Ferrari. If I do
>
> ->  emerge --pretend --verbose --newuse --update --deep world
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
>
> Total: 0 packages, Size of downloads: 0 kB
>
> However
>
> ->  emerge -evp world
>
> [ebuild     U ] x11-proto/scrnsaverproto-1.2.0 [1.1.0] 49 kB [0]
> [ebuild     U ] sys-devel/automake-1.10.3 [1.10.2] 936 kB [0]
>
> Total: 536 packages (2 upgrades, 534 reinstalls), Size of downloads:
> 1,015 kB
> Portage tree and overlays:
>   [0] /usr/portage
>   [1] /var/lib/layman/science
>
> Where
>
> ->  revdep-rebuild --ignore --pretend --verbose
>
> * Checking dynamic linking consistency
> [ 100% ]
>
>   * Dynamic linking on your system is consistent... All done.
>
> and
>
> ->  emerge --depclean --pretend --verbose
>
>    
>>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
>>>>          
> Packages installed:   538
> Packages in world:    69
> Packages in system:   50
> Required packages:    538
> Number to remove:     0
>
> So emerge -evp is useful to get those last inconsistencies out of the
> system.
>
> --
> Valmor
>
>    

You can add this option to help with those:  --with-bdeps y  I consider 
it -D on steroids.  I actually added it to make.conf so that I don't 
have to type it in each time.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Valmor de Almeida wrote:
<SNIP>
>>
>> So emerge -evp is useful to get those last inconsistencies out of the
>> system.
>>
>> --
>> Valmor
>>
>>
>
> You can add this option to help with those:  --with-bdeps y  I consider it
> -D on steroids.  I actually added it to make.conf so that I don't have to
> type it in each time.
>
> Dale

Good catch Dale. I have it in make.conf also

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>>      
> <SNIP>
>    
>>> So emerge -evp is useful to get those last inconsistencies out of the
>>> system.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Valmor
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> You can add this option to help with those:  --with-bdeps y  I consider it
>> -D on steroids.  I actually added it to make.conf so that I don't have to
>> type it in each time.
>>
>> Dale
>>      
> Good catch Dale. I have it in make.conf also
>
> - Mark
>
>    

I was the second one to catch that tho.  I think it was Alan that told 
me that when I ran into a similar issue.  After a bit we figured out 
that it was a really deep dependency that was causing me grief.  It does 
take portage longer to calculate dependencies when you add that tho.  
That little swirling thing goes at it for a while when I do my updates.  
Then again, it has a lot to think about:

Packages installed:   946
Packages in world:    78
Packages in system:   50
Required packages:    946

I'd be scratching my head too.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Valmor de Almeida]

Dale wrote:
> Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>> Mark Knecht wrote:
>>    
>>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht<markknecht@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>      
>>>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon<alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>> <SNIP>
>>>>        
>>>>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for kicks and
>>>>> put it all back together again so that not even the factory can notice...
>>>>>          
>>>> Precisely... :-)
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
>>> morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
>>> Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
>>>
>>> - Mark
>>>
>>>      
>> One interesting thing on the new Ferrari. If I do
>>
>> ->  emerge --pretend --verbose --newuse --update --deep world
>>
>> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>>
>> Calculating dependencies... done!
>>
>> Total: 0 packages, Size of downloads: 0 kB
>>
>> However
>>
>> ->  emerge -evp world
>>
>> [ebuild     U ] x11-proto/scrnsaverproto-1.2.0 [1.1.0] 49 kB [0]
>> [ebuild     U ] sys-devel/automake-1.10.3 [1.10.2] 936 kB [0]
>>
>> Total: 536 packages (2 upgrades, 534 reinstalls), Size of downloads:
>> 1,015 kB
>> Portage tree and overlays:
>>   [0] /usr/portage
>>   [1] /var/lib/layman/science
>>
>> Where
>>
>> ->  revdep-rebuild --ignore --pretend --verbose
>>
>> * Checking dynamic linking consistency
>> [ 100% ]
>>
>>   * Dynamic linking on your system is consistent... All done.
>>
>> and
>>
>> ->  emerge --depclean --pretend --verbose
>>
>>    
>>>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
>>>>>          
>> Packages installed:   538
>> Packages in world:    69
>> Packages in system:   50
>> Required packages:    538
>> Number to remove:     0
>>
>> So emerge -evp is useful to get those last inconsistencies out of the
>> system.
>>
>> --
>> Valmor
>>
>>    
> 
> You can add this option to help with those:  --with-bdeps y  I consider 
> it -D on steroids.  I actually added it to make.conf so that I don't 
> have to type it in each time.
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)
> 

Will use. Thanks,

--
Valmor

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 14 July 2010 06:39:51 Valmor de Almeida wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
> >> wrote: <SNIP>
> >> 
> >>> Unless he's the kind of guy who likes to rip his Ferrari apart for
> >>> kicks and put it all back together again so that not even the factory
> >>> can notice...
> >> 
> >> Precisely... :-)
> > 
> > Oh, and besides liking the smell of fresh baked 1 and 0's in the
> > morning emerge -e @world was an easy  way to solve my libpng problem.
> > Woke up this morning to a freshly baked Gentoo machine.
> > 
> > - Mark
> 
> One interesting thing on the new Ferrari. If I do
> 
> -> emerge --pretend --verbose --newuse --update --deep world
> 
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
> 
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> 
> Total: 0 packages, Size of downloads: 0 kB
> 
> However
> 
> -> emerge -evp world
> 
> [ebuild     U ] x11-proto/scrnsaverproto-1.2.0 [1.1.0] 49 kB [0]
> [ebuild     U ] sys-devel/automake-1.10.3 [1.10.2] 936 kB [0]
> 
> Total: 536 packages (2 upgrades, 534 reinstalls), Size of downloads:
> 1,015 kB
> Portage tree and overlays:
>  [0] /usr/portage
>  [1] /var/lib/layman/science
> 
> Where
> 
> -> revdep-rebuild --ignore --pretend --verbose
> 
> * Checking dynamic linking consistency
> [ 100% ]
> 
>  * Dynamic linking on your system is consistent... All done.
> 
> and
> 
> -> emerge --depclean --pretend --verbose
> 
> >>> No packages selected for removal by depclean
> 
> Packages installed:   538
> Packages in world:    69
> Packages in system:   50
> Required packages:    538
> Number to remove:     0
> 
> So emerge -evp is useful to get those last inconsistencies out of the
> system.


You need to read the portage man pages. There is nothing inconsistent about 
your system and there is nothing to fix. So revdep-rebuild was pointless.

Those two packages are BUILD DEPENDS, not RUNTIME DEPENDS.
They only need to be upgraded when you emerge something that will use then in 
the build phase.

Portage has had this nice feature for ages. You can switch it off in make.conf




-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[ZekeyG]

In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
> On Saturday 10 July 2010 02:57:42 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> > 
>> > I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc to
>> > the newer version
>> > 
>> > ->  gcc-config -l
>> > 
>> >   [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
>> >   [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
>> > 
>> > and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
>> > 
>> >   emerge -e system
>> >   emerge -e world
>> > 
>> > assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
>> > unmerge version 4.3.4?
>> 
>> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.
>
> And why is the OP rebuilding world at all? There's no reason to do that 
> either, there's no API/ABI break between 4.3.4 and 4.3.3

The difference is between 4.3.4 and 4.4.3, not 4.3.3

Gentoo has the new GCC slotted and the handbook

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml

Suggests emerge -e system and emerge -e world in the "General Upgrade
Instructions.

If you think the handbook is wrong or my interpretation of it wrong
then *please* tell me. I would prefer *not* to go through this nightmare
whenever GCC does a major version bump.

-- 
Regards,

Gregory.
Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 12 July 2010 10:18:48 ZekeyG@gmail.com wrote:
> In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
> > On Saturday 10 July 2010 02:57:42 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> >> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> > 
> >> > I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc
> >> > to the newer version
> >> > 
> >> > ->  gcc-config -l
> >> > 
> >> >   [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
> >> >   [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
> >> > 
> >> > and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
> >> > 
> >> >   emerge -e system
> >> >   emerge -e world
> >> > 
> >> > assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
> >> > unmerge version 4.3.4?
> >> 
> >> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.
> > 
> > And why is the OP rebuilding world at all? There's no reason to do that
> > either, there's no API/ABI break between 4.3.4 and 4.3.3
> 
> The difference is between 4.3.4 and 4.4.3, not 4.3.3.

Typo.

> Gentoo has the new GCC slotted and the handbook

Of course is slotted. gcc has been slotted since the dawn of time so that you 
can install mutiple compilers and use any one you feel like at any point. 
Tools exists to switch the current compiler in use

> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml
> 
> Suggests emerge -e system and emerge -e world in the "General Upgrade
> Instructions.

It "suggests", it does not say it is mandatory with description of why.

Periodically on this list this topic comes up and we re-hash again, for the 
unmpteenth time, why the docs are misleading. That doc was apparently written 
by someone who was looking for ways to minimize the amount of mail he gets. If 
he says to rebuild system and world, then most of the questions he gets asked 
just go away. Can't fault the dev for that....

This is all in the mail archives. Most of the whinging done by me actually

> If you think the handbook is wrong or my interpretation of it wrong
> then *please* tell me. I would prefer *not* to go through this nightmare
> whenever GCC does a major version bump.

You do not have to do what the handbook tells you, you just have to realise 
what the handbook hopes to achieve. As hinted above, the intended result 
appears to be least hassle for the gentoo devs and document writers with 
maximal guarantee that your box will work afterwards regardless fo how long it 
takes or number of cpu cycles burnt. It's not necessarily the most convenient 
way.

I have not had to rebuild world due to a compiler upgrade since sometime 
around the late 3 series (there was a C++ ABI change).

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

[gentoo-user] Re: gcc upgrade

[Nuno J. Silva]

Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:

> On Monday 12 July 2010 10:18:48 ZekeyG@gmail.com wrote:
>> In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote:
>> > On Saturday 10 July 2010 02:57:42 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> >> On 07/10/2010 04:16 AM, Valmor de Almeida wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> > 
>> >> > I just updated the portage tree and gcc was upgraded. I have set gcc
>> >> > to the newer version
>> >> > 
>> >> > ->  gcc-config -l
>> >> > 
>> >> >   [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.3.4
>> >> >   [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3 *
>> >> > 
>> >> > and I am trying to rebuild the whole system with
>> >> > 
>> >> >   emerge -e system
>> >> >   emerge -e world
>> >> > 
>> >> > assuming this all goes without trouble (will take a while), should I
>> >> > unmerge version 4.3.4?
>> >> 
>> >> There's no reason to.  Unless you don't need it anymore.

And how do we know that?

I, myself, wonder, as the previous version here is picked by depclean
for removal. Can we trust depclean? I suppose if a package didn't
compile and had no explicit dependency on the gcc version, that would be
a good reason for a bug report and an ebuild change.

>> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml
>> 
>> Suggests emerge -e system and emerge -e world in the "General Upgrade
>> Instructions.
>
> It "suggests", it does not say it is mandatory with description of why.
>
> Periodically on this list this topic comes up and we re-hash again, for the 
> unmpteenth time, why the docs are misleading. That doc was apparently written 
> by someone who was looking for ways to minimize the amount of mail he gets. If 
> he says to rebuild system and world, then most of the questions he gets asked 
> just go away. Can't fault the dev for that....

Warning: following this handbook might lead to an infinite loop, when
you sync after recompiling everything and you find a newer gcc version
was marked stable, and you have to start again.

If keeping both versions prevents the troubles fixed by recompiling
everything, then it's just not worth it removing the old version (unless
you own really fast machine).

Suggesting "emerge -e" is anyway a possible solution for problems, just
not the one to choose first.

Can't we rely on revdep-rebuild, or write something to catch known
upgrade issues? It sounds a

  while not okay 
     run revdep-rebuild

would be a better solution (but I don't know whether revdep-rebuild
catches the issues --- probably not if there is an interface change but
the library uses the same name as before...).

>
> This is all in the mail archives. Most of the whinging done by me actually
>
>> If you think the handbook is wrong or my interpretation of it wrong
>> then *please* tell me. I would prefer *not* to go through this nightmare
>> whenever GCC does a major version bump.
>
> You do not have to do what the handbook tells you, you just have to realise 
> what the handbook hopes to achieve. As hinted above, the intended result 
> appears to be least hassle for the gentoo devs and document writers with 
> maximal guarantee that your box will work afterwards regardless fo how long it 
> takes or number of cpu cycles burnt. It's not necessarily the most convenient 
> way.
>
> I have not had to rebuild world due to a compiler upgrade since sometime 
> around the late 3 series (there was a C++ ABI change).

The one which involved emerging libstdc++-v3, and which rendered the
whole system unusable due to a chicken and an egg?

-- 
Nuno J. Silva
gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg