[gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[covici]

Hi.  I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged --
amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however
after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to
S_ISCHR.   I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not
supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem.

Any ideas on this would be appreciated.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[Alex Schuster]

covici@ccs.covici.com writes:

> Hi.  I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged --
> amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however
> after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to
> S_ISCHR.   I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not
> supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem.

Looks like a real bad problem, I'm glad I did not update yet. 

http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/08/18/compounded-issues-in-glibc-2-12 has 
some explanation on this. I wonder how this glibx version did make it into 
~arch.

> Any ideas on this would be appreciated.

Don't know. Maybe wait a little and see if another new glibc fixes this, 
or the packages having issues with the new glibc might get updated.

	Wonko

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[Arttu V.]

On 8/22/10, covici@ccs.covici.com <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
> Hi.  I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged --
> amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however
> after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to
> S_ISCHR.   I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not
> supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem.
>
> Any ideas on this would be appreciated.

Which package is failing? Please check if it is already reported, and
if not then please report a new bug, and if possible make it block
this tracker bug:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331665

A wild guess out of the blue would be that the error could be simply a
missing include of stat.h in the package's sources. But there might be
other omissions as well, so please provide more info.

I think that unless API/ABIs were changed then the older, already
installed version should still work just fine, as then the missing
includes would only affect compile-time situation.

-- 
Arttu V. -- Running Gentoo is like running with scissors

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[covici]

Arttu V. <arttuv69@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 8/22/10, covici@ccs.covici.com <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
> > Hi.  I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged --
> > amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however
> > after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to
> > S_ISCHR.   I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not
> > supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem.
> >
> > Any ideas on this would be appreciated.
> 
> Which package is failing? Please check if it is already reported, and
> if not then please report a new bug, and if possible make it block
> this tracker bug:
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331665
> 
> A wild guess out of the blue would be that the error could be simply a
> missing include of stat.h in the package's sources. But there might be
> other omissions as well, so please provide more info.
> 
> I think that unless API/ABIs were changed then the older, already
> installed version should still work just fine, as then the missing
> includes would only affect compile-time situation.
> 
OK, I will check on that -- I am thinking that for that package a
missing include will fix this, but I could shoot whoever broke this
without thinking at all.  I wonder if the failure of php to compile
because my_compiler.h is missing has something to do with this also?


-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 15:29 on Sunday 22 August 2010, Arttu V. did 
opine thusly:

> On 8/22/10, covici@ccs.covici.com <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
> > Hi.  I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged --
> > amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however
> > after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to
> > S_ISCHR.   I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not
> > supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem.
> > 
> > Any ideas on this would be appreciated.
> 
> Which package is failing? Please check if it is already reported, and
> if not then please report a new bug, and if possible make it block
> this tracker bug:
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331665
> 
> A wild guess out of the blue would be that the error could be simply a
> missing include of stat.h in the package's sources. But there might be
> other omissions as well, so please provide more info.
> 
> I think that unless API/ABIs were changed then the older, already
> installed version should still work just fine, as then the missing
> includes would only affect compile-time situation.


There is a way to downgrade for the brave.

quickpkg glibc
move the 2.11.? version ebuild you want to your local overlay.
Edit it and find the check that disallows downgrades. Comment it out.
Mask glibc2.12
update glibc

At this point it's probably very wise to rebuild at least system, then revdep-
rebuild. Note that rebuilding system might fail in which case you are really 
up the creek.

Feel free to rip to pieces the dev that committed this version. It could not 
possibly have undergone decent testing

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[covici]

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

> Apparently, though unproven, at 15:29 on Sunday 22 August 2010, Arttu V. did 
> opine thusly:
> 
> > On 8/22/10, covici@ccs.covici.com <covici@ccs.covici.com> wrote:
> > > Hi.  I am running the unstable gentoo 32-bit and today I emerged --
> > > amoung other packages in a system update -- glibc-2.12.1-r1, however
> > > after doing this at least one package had an undefined reference to
> > > S_ISCHR.   I tried to downgrade glibc, but apparently this is not
> > > supported and I am a bit stumped as to how to fix this problem.
> > > 
> > > Any ideas on this would be appreciated.
> > 
> > Which package is failing? Please check if it is already reported, and
> > if not then please report a new bug, and if possible make it block
> > this tracker bug:
> > 
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=331665
> > 
> > A wild guess out of the blue would be that the error could be simply a
> > missing include of stat.h in the package's sources. But there might be
> > other omissions as well, so please provide more info.
> > 
> > I think that unless API/ABIs were changed then the older, already
> > installed version should still work just fine, as then the missing
> > includes would only affect compile-time situation.
> 
> 
> There is a way to downgrade for the brave.
> 
> quickpkg glibc
> move the 2.11.? version ebuild you want to your local overlay.
> Edit it and find the check that disallows downgrades. Comment it out.
> Mask glibc2.12
> update glibc
> 
> At this point it's probably very wise to rebuild at least system, then revdep-
> rebuild. Note that rebuilding system might fail in which case you are really 
> up the creek.
> 
> Feel free to rip to pieces the dev that committed this version. It could not 
> possibly have undergone decent testing

I have another idea -- what would I have to restore from backup to
completely cancel the entire update process I have done since yesterday
-- and then I could mask off the bad glibc and be back to something at
least somewhat consistent?


-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 20:57 on Sunday 22 August 2010, 
covici@ccs.covici.com did opine thusly:

> > There is a way to downgrade for the brave.
> >
> > 
> >
> > quickpkg glibc
> > move the 2.11.? version ebuild you want to your local overlay.
> > Edit it and find the check that disallows downgrades. Comment it out.
> > Mask glibc2.12
> > update glibc
> >
> > 
> >
> > At this point it's probably very wise to rebuild at least system, then
> > revdep- rebuild. Note that rebuilding system might fail in which case
> > you are really up the creek.
> >
> > 
> >
> > Feel free to rip to pieces the dev that committed this version. It could
> > not  possibly have undergone decent testing
> 
> I have another idea -- what would I have to restore from backup to
> completely cancel the entire update process I have done since yesterday
> -- and then I could mask off the bad glibc and be back to something at
> least somewhat consistent?


I too have another idea - look at emerge.log and tell us what you emerged 
since yesterday. Then restore those packages.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[covici]

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

> Apparently, though unproven, at 20:57 on Sunday 22 August 2010, 
> covici@ccs.covici.com did opine thusly:
> 
> > > There is a way to downgrade for the brave.
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > quickpkg glibc
> > > move the 2.11.? version ebuild you want to your local overlay.
> > > Edit it and find the check that disallows downgrades. Comment it out.
> > > Mask glibc2.12
> > > update glibc
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > At this point it's probably very wise to rebuild at least system, then
> > > revdep- rebuild. Note that rebuilding system might fail in which case
> > > you are really up the creek.
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Feel free to rip to pieces the dev that committed this version. It could
> > > not  possibly have undergone decent testing
> > 
> > I have another idea -- what would I have to restore from backup to
> > completely cancel the entire update process I have done since yesterday
> > -- and then I could mask off the bad glibc and be back to something at
> > least somewhat consistent?
> 
> 
> I too have another idea - look at emerge.log and tell us what you emerged 
> since yesterday. Then restore those packages.
> 
> 
> -- 
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

If I tried that -- how would I downgrade glibc in the process -- I am
sure I could figure out all the packages, but that downgrade scares me
-- would I do the packages in reverse order, or what?  I also changed my
gcc before this update, I could certainly reverse that as well.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 21:44 on Sunday 22 August 2010, 
covici@ccs.covici.com did opine thusly:

> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 20:57 on Sunday 22 August 2010,
> > 
> > covici@ccs.covici.com did opine thusly:
> > > > There is a way to downgrade for the brave.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > quickpkg glibc
> > > > move the 2.11.? version ebuild you want to your local overlay.
> > > > Edit it and find the check that disallows downgrades. Comment it out.
> > > > Mask glibc2.12
> > > > update glibc
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > At this point it's probably very wise to rebuild at least system,
> > > > then revdep- rebuild. Note that rebuilding system might fail in
> > > > which case you are really up the creek.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Feel free to rip to pieces the dev that committed this version. It
> > > > could not  possibly have undergone decent testing
> > > 
> > > I have another idea -- what would I have to restore from backup to
> > > completely cancel the entire update process I have done since yesterday
> > > -- and then I could mask off the bad glibc and be back to something at
> > > least somewhat consistent?
> > 
> > I too have another idea - look at emerge.log and tell us what you emerged
> > since yesterday. Then restore those packages.
> 
> If I tried that -- how would I downgrade glibc in the process -- I am
> sure I could figure out all the packages, but that downgrade scares me
> -- would I do the packages in reverse order, or what?  I also changed my
> gcc before this update, I could certainly reverse that as well.


It all depends on what tools you have available and how many packages were 
upgraded between yesterday and today. If you have tarballs for at least system 
in your packages dir, then just merge the old ones back. If not, then 
downgrade glibc and either emerge -e system or run revdep-rebuild.

gcc is not a major issue, it simply builds runnable code and links to other 
stuff. As long as the ABI didn't change, and it didn't, gcc will not cause any 
relevant problems. The real problem is glibc which provides the C library. 
Almost everything links to that and it's interfaces can and do change. So 
packages built since that upgrade may well break with a downgrade.

But like I said the best approach will depend on what packages are involved 
and you still haven't provided that list. I used to have a crystal ball that 
could gaze into your mind and your disk to find these answer, but ironically 
it too is now broken by the very same glibc upgrade you are dealing with. So 
you must look into this yourself. However, it's not all bad news - at least my 
fee to you will not increase.




-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] glibc 2.12.1-r1 seems to not be working correctly

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Sunday 22 August 2010, covici@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 20:57 on Sunday 22 August 2010,
> > 
> > covici@ccs.covici.com did opine thusly:
> > > > There is a way to downgrade for the brave.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > quickpkg glibc
> > > > move the 2.11.? version ebuild you want to your local overlay.
> > > > Edit it and find the check that disallows downgrades. Comment it out.
> > > > Mask glibc2.12
> > > > update glibc
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > At this point it's probably very wise to rebuild at least system,
> > > > then revdep- rebuild. Note that rebuilding system might fail in
> > > > which case you are really up the creek.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Feel free to rip to pieces the dev that committed this version. It
> > > > could not  possibly have undergone decent testing
> > > 
> > > I have another idea -- what would I have to restore from backup to
> > > completely cancel the entire update process I have done since yesterday
> > > -- and then I could mask off the bad glibc and be back to something at
> > > least somewhat consistent?
> > 
> > I too have another idea - look at emerge.log and tell us what you emerged
> > since yesterday. Then restore those packages.
> 
> If I tried that -- how would I downgrade glibc in the process -- I am
> sure I could figure out all the packages, but that downgrade scares me
> -- would I do the packages in reverse order, or what?  I also changed my
> gcc before this update, I could certainly reverse that as well.

you can also leave that glibc version in place. Only a few packages are 
affected, most are fixed already. Just sync and retry the failing package. 
No need to downgrade glibc and recompile a bunch of packages. Besides, between 
2.12.1 and 2.12.0 you should not need to recompile anything.