[gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Mark Knecht]

Hi,
   I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
--update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
pick, "the best version available"?

- Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[John J. Foster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 447 bytes --]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 08:01:42AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Hi,
>    I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
> --update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
> pick, "the best version available"?
> 
Although I'm not totally sure, my reading is that it will grab the
highest version marked stable. But I've been wrong before!

John
-- 
Contrary to the lie machine, the world is not safer.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Holly Bostick]

Mark Knecht schreef:
> Hi,
>    I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
> --update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
> pick, "the best version available"?
> 
> - Mark
> 

For those wondering, here's the quote:

--update (-u)
              Updates packages to the best version available, which may
not always be the highest version number due to masking for testing and
 development.   This will also update direct dependencies which may not
be what you want.  In general, use this option only in combination with
the world or system target.

I accept that this is somewhat unclear, but to explain it fully would
take more space than a man page really is for.

But anyway, the 'best' version available is mostly determined by the
arch masks, which are determined by the developers.

"Best" in this case is a somewhat poor choice of words, but at least
indicates the subjectiveness of the determination.

In any case, a few examples:


media-video/mplayer
     Available versions:  1.0_pre6-r4 1.0_pre6-r5 1.0_pre6-r6 1.0_pre7
     Installed:           1.0_pre7
     Homepage:            http://www.mplayerhq.hu/
     Description:         Media Player for Linux

All available versions of mplayer are stable, so the 'best' version is
the most recent stable.

 media-libs/xine-lib
     Available versions:  ~1_rc6-r2 1_rc8-r1 1.0-r2 1.0.1-r3 ~1.0.2
~1.1.0 ~1.1.0-r1
     Installed:           1.0.1-r3
     Homepage:            http://xine.sourceforge.net/
     Description:         Core libraries for Xine movie player

in this case, if one was using stable arch, and had not activated
unstable for this package (as I haven't), the best version is the most
recent stable (1.0.1-r3), which is not the most recent version.

However, if one was using ~arch, or had activated unstable for this
package in /etc/portage/package.mask, then the 'best' version would be
1.1.0-r1, which is the most recent revision, but not in stable Portage.

 media-video/ati-drivers
     Available versions:  8.8.25-r3 8.10.19 8.12.10 [M]8.13.3 [M]8.13.4
8.14.13 8.14.13-r1 8.14.13-r2 [M]8.14.13-r3 *8.16.20
     Installed:           8.14.13-r2
     Homepage:            http://www.ati.com
     Description:         Ati precompiled drivers for r350, r300, r250
and r200 chipsets

Now in this case, the 'best' version is the most recent stable. The
second most recent version (8.14.13-r3) is hard masked, but if I
unmasked it with /etc/portage/package.unmask (and possibly also
/etc/portage/package.keywords), then Portage would consider it the
'best', insofar as it would attempt to install it if I upgraded the
drivers. Of course, the very fact that you have to manually unmask the
packages should give you pause as to whether you really want to consider
this the 'best' for you.

The very most recent version (8.16.20) is 'not available' -- meaning
that it will never be considered the 'best' version until it returns to
Portage; masking or unmasking is of no use here. I know, because I had
unmasked and installed the latest drivers, which did not work well, to
put it mildly, and today I synced and Portage downgraded them. I would
have downgraded them manually anyway, but it  was interesting to see
Portage downgrade them by force despite the fact that they were still
unmasked.  They have so many problems that they are no longer on the
Portage radar until the issues are determined to at least an extent that
someone knows what to fix, and who has to fix it (Gentoo, the kernel
guys if it's a kernel conflict, ATI).

So, 'best' is a matter of judgement, and basically Gentoo sorts packages
into categories so that you can have some context to make the judgement
about what is best *for you*. If stable is best for you, then Portage
will choose the stable packages (because you told it to). If unstable is
best for you, then Portage will choose the unstable packages (because
you told it to). If stable is generally best, but in some specific
cases, unstable is best for you, then Portage will choose the stable
packages except where you told it that unstable is OK.

That's how it's done, mostly.

HTH,
Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Holly Bostick]

Holly Bostick schreef:
> 
>  media-libs/xine-lib
>      Available versions:  ~1_rc6-r2 1_rc8-r1 1.0-r2 1.0.1-r3 ~1.0.2
> ~1.1.0 ~1.1.0-r1
> 
> However, if one was using ~arch, or had activated unstable for this
> package in /etc/portage/package.mask, 

which should of course be "/etc/portage/package.keywords"... sigh.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Mark Knecht]

On 8/19/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
> Holly Bostick schreef:
> >
> >  media-libs/xine-lib
> >      Available versions:  ~1_rc6-r2 1_rc8-r1 1.0-r2 1.0.1-r3 ~1.0.2
> > ~1.1.0 ~1.1.0-r1
> >
> > However, if one was using ~arch, or had activated unstable for this
> > package in /etc/portage/package.mask,
> 
> which should of course be "/etc/portage/package.keywords"... sigh.

Well, yes, but you're forgiven! ;-)

(Or also at the command line with ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 even though
it's somewhat frowned upon these days.)

Cheers,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Mark Knecht]

On 8/19/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
> Mark Knecht schreef:
> > Hi,
> >    I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
> > --update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
> > pick, "the best version available"?
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> 
> For those wondering, here's the quote:
> 
> --update (-u)
>               Updates packages to the best version available, which may
> not always be the highest version number due to masking for testing and
>  development.   This will also update direct dependencies which may not
> be what you want.  In general, use this option only in combination with
> the world or system target.
> 
> I accept that this is somewhat unclear, but to explain it fully would
> take more space than a man page really is for.
> 
<SNIP>
>  media-video/ati-drivers
>      Available versions:  8.8.25-r3 8.10.19 8.12.10 [M]8.13.3 [M]8.13.4
> 8.14.13 8.14.13-r1 8.14.13-r2 [M]8.14.13-r3 *8.16.20
>      Installed:           8.14.13-r2
>      Homepage:            http://www.ati.com
>      Description:         Ati precompiled drivers for r350, r300, r250
> and r200 chipsets
> 
> Now in this case, the 'best' version is the most recent stable. The
> second most recent version (8.14.13-r3) is hard masked, but if I
> unmasked it with /etc/portage/package.unmask (and possibly also
> /etc/portage/package.keywords), then Portage would consider it the
> 'best', insofar as it would attempt to install it if I upgraded the
> drivers. Of course, the very fact that you have to manually unmask the
> packages should give you pause as to whether you really want to consider
> this the 'best' for you.
> 
> The very most recent version (8.16.20) is 'not available' -- meaning
> that it will never be considered the 'best' version until it returns to
> Portage; masking or unmasking is of no use here. I know, because I had
> unmasked and installed the latest drivers, which did not work well, to
> put it mildly, and today I synced and Portage downgraded them. I would
> have downgraded them manually anyway, but it  was interesting to see
> Portage downgrade them by force despite the fact that they were still
> unmasked.  They have so many problems that they are no longer on the
> Portage radar until the issues are determined to at least an extent that
> someone knows what to fix, and who has to fix it (Gentoo, the kernel
> guys if it's a kernel conflict, ATI).
> 
Hi Holly,
   Yes, the explanation you give is pretty much what I already knew,
with the exception of the ati-drivers example. If this thread is worth
continuing then it's probably around that sort of situation.

   So far:

MASKED == not available unless we unmask a package by hand.

for stable - highest available stable version would be chosen
for ~arch - highest version available, whether stable or ~arch, would be chosen

However, in your ati-drivers example you use the term 'not available'
for the 8.16.20 version. That's an interesting choice of words since
any version 'not available' would (in my mind) never be chosen by
--update. It's not part of 'best' because it's not available, or so it
seems to me. Best is still the highest version using stable and only
changes (I think) if you do an umask in portage.unmask.

   I think that my question was mostly born out of sort of vague
language in the man page. I don't think there's any real mystery here
but I've wondered about if for awhile and just wanted to be sure I
wasn't missing some great undiscovered feature of portage!

   Thanks for taking the time to write.

Cheers,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Holly Bostick]

Mark Knecht schreef:
> On 8/19/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
> 
>>Mark Knecht schreef:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>   I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
>>>--update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
>>>pick, "the best version available"?
>>>
>>>- Mark
>>>
>>
>>For those wondering, here's the quote:
>>
>>--update (-u)
>>              Updates packages to the best version available, which may
>>not always be the highest version number due to masking for testing and
>> development.   This will also update direct dependencies which may not
>>be what you want.  In general, use this option only in combination with
>>the world or system target.
>>
>>I accept that this is somewhat unclear, but to explain it fully would
>>take more space than a man page really is for.
>>
> 
> <SNIP>
> 
>> media-video/ati-drivers
>>     Available versions:  8.8.25-r3 8.10.19 8.12.10 [M]8.13.3 [M]8.13.4
>>8.14.13 8.14.13-r1 8.14.13-r2 [M]8.14.13-r3 *8.16.20
>>     Installed:           8.14.13-r2
>>     Homepage:            http://www.ati.com
>>     Description:         Ati precompiled drivers for r350, r300, r250
>>and r200 chipsets
>>
>>Now in this case, the 'best' version is the most recent stable. The
>>second most recent version (8.14.13-r3) is hard masked, but if I
>>unmasked it with /etc/portage/package.unmask (and possibly also
>>/etc/portage/package.keywords), then Portage would consider it the
>>'best', insofar as it would attempt to install it if I upgraded the
>>drivers. Of course, the very fact that you have to manually unmask the
>>packages should give you pause as to whether you really want to consider
>>this the 'best' for you.
>>
>>The very most recent version (8.16.20) is 'not available' -- meaning
>>that it will never be considered the 'best' version until it returns to
>>Portage; masking or unmasking is of no use here. I know, because I had
>>unmasked and installed the latest drivers, which did not work well, to
>>put it mildly, and today I synced and Portage downgraded them. I would
>>have downgraded them manually anyway, but it  was interesting to see
>>Portage downgrade them by force despite the fact that they were still
>>unmasked.  They have so many problems that they are no longer on the
>>Portage radar until the issues are determined to at least an extent that
>>someone knows what to fix, and who has to fix it (Gentoo, the kernel
>>guys if it's a kernel conflict, ATI).
>>
> 
> Hi Holly,
>    Yes, the explanation you give is pretty much what I already knew,
> with the exception of the ati-drivers example. If this thread is worth
> continuing then it's probably around that sort of situation.
> 
>    So far:
> 
> MASKED == not available unless we unmask a package by hand.
> 
> for stable - highest available stable version would be chosen
> for ~arch - highest version available, whether stable or ~arch, would be chosen
> 
> However, in your ati-drivers example you use the term 'not available'
> for the 8.16.20 version. That's an interesting choice of words since
> any version 'not available' would (in my mind) never be chosen by
> --update. It's not part of 'best' because it's not available, or so it
> seems to me. 

It's not my choice of words. Look at packages.gentoo.org and search
ati-drivers.

8.16.20 is - for x86, which in the legend is listed as 'not available'.
However, this is a status change from yesterday, when it was hard masked
(actually hard masked so I had to unmask it in package.unmask). Today
the package is no longer available, so when I went to update the package
again (after a sync), the package was downgraded, despite still being
unmasked. Atm I still have the ebuild, but I imagine if I synced again,
it would be removed. The reason I mention it is that if 'best' means
'the most recent' (which is really the only way to quantify such a
subjective quality as 'best' for an automated system like Portage), the
'best' version has been known to be removed from Portage completely.
Consider the case of unace, for example. The version available in
Portage is quite old, and won't open newer *.ace files due to its age,
but the 'best' version (i.e., the most current) is not available in
Portage at all (unstable or masked; it's just 'not available', because
of serious security bugs.

> Best is still the highest version using stable and only
> changes (I think) if you do an umask in portage.unmask.

'Best' is the highest version available in Portage, based on your
profile (profiles mask packages or keywords based on the needs of the
profile), your ACCEPT_KEYWORDS setting in /etc/make.conf (which may be
~arch, after all, so "the highest version using stable" would not be
accurate in that case), and any adjustments you may have made in
/etc/portage/package.keywords and/or /etc/portage/package.unmask.

Because 'best' is a matter of judgement, and these settings are your
judgement as to what is 'best' for you.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Mark Knecht]

On 8/19/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
> 
> It's not my choice of words. Look at packages.gentoo.org and search
> ati-drivers.
> 


Sorry. Didn't mean to imply you were making anything up.

thanks,
Mark

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Peter O'Connor]

Holly Bostick wrote:

>Mark Knecht schreef:
>  
>
>>On 8/19/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Mark Knecht schreef:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>  I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
>>>>--update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
>>>>pick, "the best version available"?
>>>>
>>>>- Mark
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>For those wondering, here's the quote:
>>>
>>>--update (-u)
>>>             Updates packages to the best version available, which may
>>>not always be the highest version number due to masking for testing and
>>>development.   This will also update direct dependencies which may not
>>>be what you want.  In general, use this option only in combination with
>>>the world or system target.
>>>
>>>I accept that this is somewhat unclear, but to explain it fully would
>>>take more space than a man page really is for.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>><SNIP>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>media-video/ati-drivers
>>>    Available versions:  8.8.25-r3 8.10.19 8.12.10 [M]8.13.3 [M]8.13.4
>>>8.14.13 8.14.13-r1 8.14.13-r2 [M]8.14.13-r3 *8.16.20
>>>    Installed:           8.14.13-r2
>>>    Homepage:            http://www.ati.com
>>>    Description:         Ati precompiled drivers for r350, r300, r250
>>>and r200 chipsets
>>>
>>>Now in this case, the 'best' version is the most recent stable. The
>>>second most recent version (8.14.13-r3) is hard masked, but if I
>>>unmasked it with /etc/portage/package.unmask (and possibly also
>>>/etc/portage/package.keywords), then Portage would consider it the
>>>'best', insofar as it would attempt to install it if I upgraded the
>>>drivers. Of course, the very fact that you have to manually unmask the
>>>packages should give you pause as to whether you really want to consider
>>>this the 'best' for you.
>>>
>>>The very most recent version (8.16.20) is 'not available' -- meaning
>>>that it will never be considered the 'best' version until it returns to
>>>Portage; masking or unmasking is of no use here. I know, because I had
>>>unmasked and installed the latest drivers, which did not work well, to
>>>put it mildly, and today I synced and Portage downgraded them. I would
>>>have downgraded them manually anyway, but it  was interesting to see
>>>Portage downgrade them by force despite the fact that they were still
>>>unmasked.  They have so many problems that they are no longer on the
>>>Portage radar until the issues are determined to at least an extent that
>>>someone knows what to fix, and who has to fix it (Gentoo, the kernel
>>>guys if it's a kernel conflict, ATI).
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Hi Holly,
>>   Yes, the explanation you give is pretty much what I already knew,
>>with the exception of the ati-drivers example. If this thread is worth
>>continuing then it's probably around that sort of situation.
>>
>>   So far:
>>
>>MASKED == not available unless we unmask a package by hand.
>>
>>for stable - highest available stable version would be chosen
>>for ~arch - highest version available, whether stable or ~arch, would be chosen
>>
>>However, in your ati-drivers example you use the term 'not available'
>>for the 8.16.20 version. That's an interesting choice of words since
>>any version 'not available' would (in my mind) never be chosen by
>>--update. It's not part of 'best' because it's not available, or so it
>>seems to me. 
>>    
>>
>
>It's not my choice of words. Look at packages.gentoo.org and search
>ati-drivers.
>
>8.16.20 is - for x86, which in the legend is listed as 'not available'.
>However, this is a status change from yesterday, when it was hard masked
>(actually hard masked so I had to unmask it in package.unmask). Today
>the package is no longer available, so when I went to update the package
>again (after a sync), the package was downgraded, despite still being
>unmasked. Atm I still have the ebuild, but I imagine if I synced again,
>it would be removed. The reason I mention it is that if 'best' means
>'the most recent' (which is really the only way to quantify such a
>subjective quality as 'best' for an automated system like Portage), the
>'best' version has been known to be removed from Portage completely.
>Consider the case of unace, for example. The version available in
>Portage is quite old, and won't open newer *.ace files due to its age,
>but the 'best' version (i.e., the most current) is not available in
>Portage at all (unstable or masked; it's just 'not available', because
>of serious security bugs.
>
>  
>
I don't believe the ebuild will be removed at any stage from portage for 
8.16.20. I'd say this is so people (more the developers with more skills 
than I) can have a crack at fixing the problems encountered with the 
ebuild. What they have done is remove all architectures from the ebuild 
so that it won't be installed without user intervention (exactly like 
gcc4 versions)

KEYWORDS="-*" #~amd64 ~x86" (The #~amd64 ~x86" part is not included as 
the brackets are already closed)

The package is not available on any architectures (therefore no longer 
masked) The way to make it available (not that I'd recommend it) is to 
put the following in /etc/portage/package.keywords

media-video/ati-drivers -*

By doing that (and only that) has the new version become available to 
emerge

*  media-video/ati-drivers
      Latest version available: 8.16.20
      Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
      Size of downloaded files: 27,140 kB

Peter

>>Best is still the highest version using stable and only
>>changes (I think) if you do an umask in portage.unmask.
>>    
>>
>
>'Best' is the highest version available in Portage, based on your
>profile (profiles mask packages or keywords based on the needs of the
>profile), your ACCEPT_KEYWORDS setting in /etc/make.conf (which may be
>~arch, after all, so "the highest version using stable" would not be
>accurate in that case), and any adjustments you may have made in
>/etc/portage/package.keywords and/or /etc/portage/package.unmask.
>
>Because 'best' is a matter of judgement, and these settings are your
>judgement as to what is 'best' for you.
>
>Holly
>  
>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --update -> "the best version available"

[Willie Wong]

On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 05:27:39PM +0200, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Mark Knecht schreef:
> > Hi,
> >    I wonder what the explanation in the emerge man page about the
> > --update option really means. What is meant by, and how does emerge
> > pick, "the best version available"?
> > 
> > - Mark
> > 
> 
<snip> 
> So, 'best' is a matter of judgement, and basically Gentoo sorts packages
> into categories so that you can have some context to make the judgement
> about what is best *for you*. If stable is best for you, then Portage
> will choose the stable packages (because you told it to). If unstable is
> best for you, then Portage will choose the unstable packages (because
> you told it to). If stable is generally best, but in some specific
> cases, unstable is best for you, then Portage will choose the stable
> packages except where you told it that unstable is OK.
> 
> That's how it's done, mostly.

One other thing is that --update is often contrasted against the now
deprecated --upgradeonly option from yonder times. 

If, say, you updated a package yesterday, and someone found a critical
bug in it this morning. The devs decide to hard-mask the ebuild until
the problem is solved. 
   emerge --update world
will downgrade that packages to the latest one not hard-masked and
fits in your profile, while 
   emerge --upgradeonly world
will skip that downgrade. I suppose this might have been used before
packages.keywords were introduced and allowed people who installed
certain programs using 
   KEYWORDS="~arch" emerge ...
to not constantly worry about the up-and-down jumpiness of updates. 

Best, 

W
-- 
"`You ARE Zaphod Beeblebrox?'
`Yeah,' said Zaphod, `but don't shout it out or they'll all 
want one.'
`THE Zaphod Beeblebrox?'
`No, just A Zaphod Bebblebrox, didn't you hear I come in 
six packs?'
`But sir,' it squealed, `I just heard on the sub-ether 
radio report. It said you were dead...'
`Yeah, that's right, I just haven't stopped moving yet.'"

- Zaphod and the Guide's receptionist. 
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 7 days, 19:07
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list