[gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 464 bytes --]

Or should I say portage as a whole.  Anyway, my latest emerge world
failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10 (!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.
The weird part is that I cannot find any reason for that package to
be emerged.
1) the world file contains just "sun-jdk"
2) "equery depends =sun-jdk-1.4.2.10" shows nothing at all
3) sun-jdk does not appear at all in /etc/portage/package.* files

How should I explore this further?

--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 549 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Jason Stubbs]

On Saturday 31 December 2005 13:58, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> Or should I say portage as a whole.  Anyway, my latest emerge world
> failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10 (!!!).  The current one is 1.5
> something. The weird part is that I cannot find any reason for that package
> to be emerged.
> 1) the world file contains just "sun-jdk"
> 2) "equery depends =sun-jdk-1.4.2.10" shows nothing at all
> 3) sun-jdk does not appear at all in /etc/portage/package.* files
>
> How should I explore this further?

Whatever command you used to update, add --tree --pretend to it.

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2102 bytes --]

On 12/30/05, Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Saturday 31 December 2005 13:58, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > Or should I say portage as a whole.  Anyway, my latest emerge world
> > failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10 (!!!).  The current one is 1.5
> > something. The weird part is that I cannot find any reason for that
> package
> > to be emerged.
> > 1) the world file contains just "sun-jdk"
> > 2) "equery depends =sun-jdk-1.4.2.10" shows nothing at all
> > 3) sun-jdk does not appear at all in /etc/portage/package.* files
> >
> > How should I explore this further?
>
> Whatever command you used to update, add --tree --pretend to it.


This is interesting.   sys-libs/db causes the old Java to be emerged.
However, I've deleted that version, and then I re-emerged sys-libs/db.
It still is calling for the old Java version.

There are 3 versions of sys-libs/db installed.  Could it be mis-identifying
the culprit?  I'm not entirely sure of the safest way to get rid of old
versions that don't automatically disappear with autoclean, so I tend
to leave things around.

++ kevin


treat ~ # emerge -aDvu --tree world

These are the packages that I would merge, in reverse order:

Calculating world dependencies ...done!
[nomerge      ] app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd-4.4
[nomerge      ]  app-text/sgml-common-0.6.3-r4
[nomerge      ]   sys-devel/automake-1.9.6-r1
[nomerge      ]    dev-lang/perl-5.8.6-r8  +berkdb -build -debug +doc +gdbm
-ithreads -minimal -perlsuid
[nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc +java -nocxx
+tcltk
[ebuild  NSF  ]      dev-java/sun-jdk-1.4.2.10  +X +alsa -browserplugin +doc
-examples -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 35,592 kB

Total size of downloads: 35,592 kB

Do you want me to merge these packages? [Yes/No] no

Quitting.


treat ~ # equery list sys-libs/db
[ Searching for package 'db' in 'sys-libs' among: ]
 * installed packages
[I--] [  ] sys-libs/db-4.1.25_p1-r4 (4.1)
[I--] [  ] sys-libs/db-1.85-r2 (1)
[I--] [  ] sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1 (4.2)
treat ~ #
--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2882 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Jason Stubbs]

> > On Saturday 31 December 2005 13:58, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > > Or should I say portage as a whole.  Anyway, my latest emerge world
> > > failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10 (!!!).  The current one is 1.5
> > > something. The weird part is that I cannot find any reason for that
> > > package to be emerged.

On Saturday 31 December 2005 16:02, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> treat ~ # emerge -aDvu --tree world
...
> [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc +java -nocxx
> +tcltk
> [ebuild  NSF  ]      dev-java/sun-jdk-1.4.2.10  +X +alsa -browserplugin
> +doc -examples -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 35,592 kB

sys-libs/db doesn't specifically rely on a version less than 1.5. Perhaps, the 
problem is:

$ emerge -p =sun-jdk-1.5*
...
!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "=sun-jdk-1.5*" have been masked.
!!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:
- dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.06 (masked by: package.mask)
# <axxo@gentoo.org>
# Lotsa things in the tree don't compile with 1.5 yet
# 1.5 defaults too -target 1.5 making downgrading to a 1.4(/1.3)
# impossible, see bug #69970 and bug 65937 for more information/discussion
# http://www.gentoo-wiki.com/Java_FAQ

Do you have sun-jdk in /etc/portage/package.unmask?

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Holly Bostick]

Kevin O'Gorman schreef:
> On 12/30/05, Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Saturday 31 December 2005 13:58, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>> 
>>> Or should I say portage as a whole.  Anyway, my latest emerge
>>> world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10 (!!!).  The current one
>>> is 1.5 something. The weird part is that I cannot find any reason
>>> for that
>> 
>> package
>> 
>>> to be emerged. 1) the world file contains just "sun-jdk" 2)
>>> "equery depends =sun-jdk-1.4.2.10" shows nothing at all 3)
>>> sun-jdk does not appear at all in /etc/portage/package.* files
>>> 
>>> How should I explore this further?
>> 
>> Whatever command you used to update, add --tree --pretend to it.
> 
> This is interesting.   sys-libs/db causes the old Java to be emerged.
>  However, I've deleted that version, and then I re-emerged
> sys-libs/db. It still is calling for the old Java version.

If you look at  the output

> [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc +java
> -nocxx +tcltk

the reason db is calling for java is because you have the "java" USE
flag set for db.

Do you really need db to use Java? If not, disable the flag (# echo
'sys-libs/db -java'  >>/etc/portage/package.use); problem solved.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Jason Stubbs]

On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
> If you look at  the output
>
> > [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc +java
> > -nocxx +tcltk
>
> the reason db is calling for java is because you have the "java" USE
> flag set for db.
>
> Do you really need db to use Java? If not, disable the flag (# echo
> 'sys-libs/db -java'  >>/etc/portage/package.use); problem solved.

All the way up until the next package which depends on java. Only the first 
package that is came across is listed as the parent. sys-libs/db doesn't call 
for any specific version of java. The complaint is that sun-jdk-1.5 is 
installed but emerge is wanting to install sun-jdk-1.4. This indicates that 
sun-jdk-1.5 is likely masked.

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Holly Bostick]

Jason Stubbs schreef:
> On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
> 
>> If you look at  the output
>> 
>> 
>>> [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc 
>>> +java -nocxx +tcltk
>> 
>> the reason db is calling for java is because you have the "java" 
>> USE flag set for db.
>> 
>> Do you really need db to use Java? If not, disable the flag (# echo
>>  'sys-libs/db -java'  >>/etc/portage/package.use); problem solved.
> 
> 
> All the way up until the next package which depends on java. Only the
>  first package that is came across is listed as the parent. 
> sys-libs/db doesn't call for any specific version of java. The 
> complaint is that sun-jdk-1.5 is installed but emerge is wanting to 
> install sun-jdk-1.4. This indicates that sun-jdk-1.5 is likely 
> masked.
> 

Well that's all true, Jason, but my point was that this is an *option*,
not a hard dependency, and many times people have USE flags enabled for
things they don't even need (or need for the specific program).

So Kevin certainly could unmask sun-jdk 1.5 --and if it's installed, then
how did that happen without it being unmasked? Sun-jdk-1.5 is
hard-masked! The original post does not say that any version of the jdk
is actually installed:

> Anyway, my latest emerge world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10 
> (!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.

Meaning (to me) that Kevin is referring to the current *available*
*version* of sun-jdk, not to any version he might have installed (and my
impression is that he does not in fact have any version of sun-jdk
installed), and he's just concerned that an "out-of-date" version will
be installed rather than the latest.

But if he doesn't need java support in the db at all, then disabling the
USE flag entirely (globally or for this package alone), then java won't
be called by the emerge of db, which saves having to unmask a package
that Kevin may have concerns about installing in the first place if he
runs stable, or even unstable-- sun-jdk-1.5 *is* hard-masked, after all,
and one should rightfully think twice and then think again about
installing a hard-masked package-- and secondly does not install bloat
onto the system (if he doesn't need java support in db, then he has no
reason to install it, or spend the extra compile time installing db java
support).

I've often solved similar issues on my own system by the simple
expedient of disabling the USE flag that was calling the dependency that
was giving me a problem. Helps keep the system clean.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Jason Stubbs]

On Saturday 31 December 2005 23:53, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Jason Stubbs schreef:
> > On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
> > Anyway, my latest emerge world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10
> > (!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.
>
> Meaning (to me) that Kevin is referring to the current *available*
> *version* of sun-jdk, not to any version he might have installed (and my
> impression is that he does not in fact have any version of sun-jdk
> installed), and he's just concerned that an "out-of-date" version will
> be installed rather than the latest.

Okay, that could be taken either way. I'm sure that all possibly relevant 
information is now available though. :)

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Holly Bostick]

Jason Stubbs schreef:
> On Saturday 31 December 2005 23:53, Holly Bostick wrote:
> 
>>Jason Stubbs schreef:
>>
>>>On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
>>>Anyway, my latest emerge world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10
>>>(!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.
>>
>>Meaning (to me) that Kevin is referring to the current *available*
>>*version* of sun-jdk, not to any version he might have installed (and my
>>impression is that he does not in fact have any version of sun-jdk
>>installed), and he's just concerned that an "out-of-date" version will
>>be installed rather than the latest.
> 
> 
> Okay, that could be taken either way. I'm sure that all possibly relevant 
> information is now available though. :)
> 

Absolutely agreed.

:D

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5045 bytes --]

Synopsis: I do have java 1.5 unmasked.  I need it for the classes I teach.
So why doesn't db use java 1.5?

On 12/31/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> Jason Stubbs schreef:
> > On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
> >
> >> If you look at  the output
> >>
> >>
> >>> [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc
> >>> +java -nocxx +tcltk
> >>
> >> the reason db is calling for java is because you have the "java"
> >> USE flag set for db.
> >>
> >> Do you really need db to use Java? If not, disable the flag (# echo
> >>  'sys-libs/db -java'  >>/etc/portage/package.use); problem solved.
> >
> >
> > All the way up until the next package which depends on java. Only the
> >  first package that is came across is listed as the parent.
> > sys-libs/db doesn't call for any specific version of java. The
> > complaint is that sun-jdk-1.5 is installed but emerge is wanting to
> > install sun-jdk-1.4. This indicates that sun-jdk-1.5 is likely
> > masked.
> >
>
> Well that's all true, Jason, but my point was that this is an *option*,
> not a hard dependency, and many times people have USE flags enabled for
> things they don't even need (or need for the specific program).
>
> So Kevin certainly could unmask sun-jdk 1.5 --and if it's installed, then
> how did that happen without it being unmasked? Sun-jdk-1.5 is
> hard-masked! The original post does not say that any version of the jdk
> is actually installed:
>
> > Anyway, my latest emerge world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10
> > (!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.
>
> Meaning (to me) that Kevin is referring to the current *available*
> *version* of sun-jdk, not to any version he might have installed (and my
> impression is that he does not in fact have any version of sun-jdk
> installed), and he's just concerned that an "out-of-date" version will
> be installed rather than the latest.
>
> But if he doesn't need java support in the db at all, then disabling the
> USE flag entirely (globally or for this package alone), then java won't
> be called by the emerge of db, which saves having to unmask a package
> that Kevin may have concerns about installing in the first place if he
> runs stable, or even unstable-- sun-jdk-1.5 *is* hard-masked, after all,
> and one should rightfully think twice and then think again about
> installing a hard-masked package-- and secondly does not install bloat
> onto the system (if he doesn't need java support in db, then he has no
> reason to install it, or spend the extra compile time installing db java
> support).
>
> I've often solved similar issues on my own system by the simple
> expedient of disabling the USE flag that was calling the dependency that
> was giving me a problem. Helps keep the system clean.


This has been pretty informative.  Perhaps I'm getting closer to
understanding this.

Fact: I do have Java 1.5 unmasked.  I teach java, and need to be using the
current version.  I have the java USE flag on generally, so there will
probably be a number of packages that will call for it.  On the other hand,
I don't have a specific need for it in 'db' which I never use explicitly --
I use gdbm or one of the SQL products for what database stuff I do
personally.

The question now seems to be: why doesn't db use Java 1.5?  Watching the
emerge go by, it seemed to be doing just that -- the filenames were all 1.5.
However, it's not just db.  When I disable java in db using package.use, the
problem just switches to another dependency path:

[nomerge      ] x11-terms/xterm-204  +Xaw3d -toolbar +truetype -unicode
[nomerge      ]  x11-libs/Xaw3d-1.5-r1
[nomerge      ]      x11-base/xorg-x11-6.8.2-r6  -3dfx -3dnow +bitmap-fonts
-cjk -debug -dlloader -dmx +doc -font-server -insecure-drivers +ipv6
-minimal +mmx +nls -nocxx +opengl +pam -sdk +sse -static +truetype-fonts
+type1-fonts (-uclibc) -xprint +xv
[nomerge      ]       sys-apps/util-linux-2.12r-r1  +crypt +nls -old-crypt
+pam +perl (-selinux) -static
[nomerge      ]        sys-apps/pam-login-3.17  -livecd +nls (-selinux)
[nomerge      ]         sys-apps/shadow-4.0.7-r4  +nls -nousuid +pam
(-selinux) -skey
[nomerge      ]          sys-apps/portage-2.0.53  -build (-selinux)
[nomerge      ]           app-misc/pax-utils-0.1.4  +caps
[nomerge      ]            sys-libs/libcap-1.10-r5  -nocxx +python -static
[nomerge      ]             dev-lang/swig-1.3.21  +X +doc +guile +java +perl
-php +python +ruby +tcltk
[ebuild  NSF  ]              dev-java/sun-jdk-1.4.2.10  +X +alsa
-browserplugin +doc -examples -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 35,592 kB

Of course, since Java is slotted, I should probably just go ahead and
re-emerge  that older version.   I was not clear when I said that emerge
failed, because there is the option to download the file from Sun.  It still
seems weird, though, that these packages are not satisfying their dependency
with the Java that I have.

Sigh.

--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6489 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Holly Bostick]

Kevin O'Gorman schreef:
> Synopsis: I do have java 1.5 unmasked.  I need it for the classes I
> teach. So why doesn't db use java 1.5?
> 
> On 12/31/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
> 
>> Jason Stubbs schreef:
>> 
>>> On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> If you look at  the output
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc
>>>>>  +java -nocxx +tcltk
>>>> 
>>>> the reason db is calling for java is because you have the
>>>> "java" USE flag set for db.
>>>> 
>>>> Do you really need db to use Java? If not, disable the flag (#
>>>> echo 'sys-libs/db -java'  >>/etc/portage/package.use); problem
>>>> solved.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> All the way up until the next package which depends on java. Only
>>> the first package that is came across is listed as the parent. 
>>> sys-libs/db doesn't call for any specific version of java. The 
>>> complaint is that sun-jdk-1.5 is installed but emerge is wanting
>>> to install sun-jdk-1.4. This indicates that sun-jdk-1.5 is likely
>>>  masked.
>>> 
>> 
>> Well that's all true, Jason, but my point was that this is an
>> *option*, not a hard dependency, and many times people have USE
>> flags enabled for things they don't even need (or need for the
>> specific program).
>> 
>> So Kevin certainly could unmask sun-jdk 1.5 --and if it's
>> installed, then how did that happen without it being unmasked?
>> Sun-jdk-1.5 is hard-masked! The original post does not say that any
>> version of the jdk is actually installed:
>> 
>> 
>>> Anyway, my latest emerge world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10
>>>  (!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.
>> 
>> Meaning (to me) that Kevin is referring to the current *available* 
>> *version* of sun-jdk, not to any version he might have installed
>> (and my impression is that he does not in fact have any version of
>> sun-jdk installed), and he's just concerned that an "out-of-date"
>> version will be installed rather than the latest.
>> 
>> But if he doesn't need java support in the db at all, then
>> disabling the USE flag entirely (globally or for this package
>> alone), then java won't be called by the emerge of db, which saves
>> having to unmask a package that Kevin may have concerns about
>> installing in the first place if he runs stable, or even unstable--
>> sun-jdk-1.5 *is* hard-masked, after all, and one should rightfully
>> think twice and then think again about installing a hard-masked
>> package-- and secondly does not install bloat onto the system (if
>> he doesn't need java support in db, then he has no reason to
>> install it, or spend the extra compile time installing db java 
>> support).
>> 
>> I've often solved similar issues on my own system by the simple 
>> expedient of disabling the USE flag that was calling the dependency
>> that was giving me a problem. Helps keep the system clean.
> 
> 
> 
> This has been pretty informative.  Perhaps I'm getting closer to 
> understanding this.
> 
> Fact: I do have Java 1.5 unmasked.  I teach java, and need to be
> using the current version.  I have the java USE flag on generally, so
> there will probably be a number of packages that will call for it.
> On the other hand, I don't have a specific need for it in 'db' which
> I never use explicitly -- I use gdbm or one of the SQL products for
> what database stuff I do personally.
> 
> The question now seems to be: why doesn't db use Java 1.5?  Watching
> the emerge go by, it seemed to be doing just that -- the filenames
> were all 1.5. However, it's not just db.  When I disable java in db
> using package.use, the problem just switches to another dependency
> path:
> 
> [nomerge      ]             dev-lang/swig-1.3.21  +X +doc +guile
> +java +perl -php +python +ruby +tcltk [ebuild  NSF  ]
> dev-java/sun-jdk-1.4.2.10  +X +alsa -browserplugin +doc -examples
> -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 35,592 kB

Quite possibly because the issue may be in your virtuals rather than in
the world file:

Runtime Dependencies
swig-1.3.27
<snip>
    java virtual/jdk


I presume that db (among others) also relies on virtual/jdk rather than
an explicit package or package version).

And iirc, the virtual is not going to be linked to a hard-masked package
(or at least it most likely is not atm, or the hard-masked packages are
listed after the stable packages).

So what I would do is check /var/cache/edb/virtuals and see what the
listing for jdk actually is.

IIrc, mine now reads

virtual/jdk dev-java/sun-jdk dev-java/blackdown-jdk

because I manually reversed sun-jdk and blackdown-jdk; otherwise
everything that relied on virtual/jdk kept trying to install blackdown,
which I don't want.

And may I ask, when you say that you have sun-jdk unmasked, you mean
both in package.unmask and in package.keywords, right? Because it not
being unmasked in package.keywords (as well as disabling the hard mask
in package.unmask) is the only reason I can think of that only the
stable version is coming up (since clearly swig, for example, is
recognizing that sun-jdk is the preferred virtual/jdk as opposed to all
the other java jdks that are available, but does not recognize the
unstable versions thereof).

Anyway, a bit confused, but I hope it's helpful.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6510 bytes --]

Synopsis: I'm really confused

On 12/31/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> Kevin O'Gorman schreef:
> > Synopsis: I do have java 1.5 unmasked.  I need it for the classes I
> > teach. So why doesn't db use java 1.5?
> >
> > On 12/31/05, Holly Bostick <motub@planet.nl> wrote:
> >
> >> Jason Stubbs schreef:
> >>
> >>> On Saturday 31 December 2005 21:57, Holly Bostick wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> If you look at  the output
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> [nomerge      ]     sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc
> >>>>>  +java -nocxx +tcltk
> >>>>
> >>>> the reason db is calling for java is because you have the
> >>>> "java" USE flag set for db.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do you really need db to use Java? If not, disable the flag (#
> >>>> echo 'sys-libs/db -java'  >>/etc/portage/package.use); problem
> >>>> solved.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> All the way up until the next package which depends on java. Only
> >>> the first package that is came across is listed as the parent.
> >>> sys-libs/db doesn't call for any specific version of java. The
> >>> complaint is that sun-jdk-1.5 is installed but emerge is wanting
> >>> to install sun-jdk-1.4. This indicates that sun-jdk-1.5 is likely
> >>>  masked.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Well that's all true, Jason, but my point was that this is an
> >> *option*, not a hard dependency, and many times people have USE
> >> flags enabled for things they don't even need (or need for the
> >> specific program).
> >>
> >> So Kevin certainly could unmask sun-jdk 1.5 --and if it's
> >> installed, then how did that happen without it being unmasked?
> >> Sun-jdk-1.5 is hard-masked! The original post does not say that any
> >> version of the jdk is actually installed:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Anyway, my latest emerge world failed because of sun-jdk-1.4.2.10
> >>>  (!!!).  The current one is 1.5 something.
> >>
> >> Meaning (to me) that Kevin is referring to the current *available*
> >> *version* of sun-jdk, not to any version he might have installed
> >> (and my impression is that he does not in fact have any version of
> >> sun-jdk installed), and he's just concerned that an "out-of-date"
> >> version will be installed rather than the latest.
> >>
> >> But if he doesn't need java support in the db at all, then
> >> disabling the USE flag entirely (globally or for this package
> >> alone), then java won't be called by the emerge of db, which saves
> >> having to unmask a package that Kevin may have concerns about
> >> installing in the first place if he runs stable, or even unstable--
> >> sun-jdk-1.5 *is* hard-masked, after all, and one should rightfully
> >> think twice and then think again about installing a hard-masked
> >> package-- and secondly does not install bloat onto the system (if
> >> he doesn't need java support in db, then he has no reason to
> >> install it, or spend the extra compile time installing db java
> >> support).
> >>
> >> I've often solved similar issues on my own system by the simple
> >> expedient of disabling the USE flag that was calling the dependency
> >> that was giving me a problem. Helps keep the system clean.
> >
> >
> >
> > This has been pretty informative.  Perhaps I'm getting closer to
> > understanding this.
> >
> > Fact: I do have Java 1.5 unmasked.  I teach java, and need to be
> > using the current version.  I have the java USE flag on generally, so
> > there will probably be a number of packages that will call for it.
> > On the other hand, I don't have a specific need for it in 'db' which
> > I never use explicitly -- I use gdbm or one of the SQL products for
> > what database stuff I do personally.
> >
> > The question now seems to be: why doesn't db use Java 1.5?  Watching
> > the emerge go by, it seemed to be doing just that -- the filenames
> > were all 1.5. However, it's not just db.  When I disable java in db
> > using package.use, the problem just switches to another dependency
> > path:
> >
> > [nomerge      ]             dev-lang/swig-1.3.21  +X +doc +guile
> > +java +perl -php +python +ruby +tcltk [ebuild  NSF  ]
> > dev-java/sun-jdk-1.4.2.10  +X +alsa -browserplugin +doc -examples
> > -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 35,592 kB
>
> Quite possibly because the issue may be in your virtuals rather than in
> the world file:
>
> Runtime Dependencies
> swig-1.3.27
> <snip>
>     java virtual/jdk
>
>
> I presume that db (among others) also relies on virtual/jdk rather than
> an explicit package or package version).
>
> And iirc, the virtual is not going to be linked to a hard-masked package
> (or at least it most likely is not atm, or the hard-masked packages are
> listed after the stable packages).
>
> So what I would do is check /var/cache/edb/virtuals and see what the
> listing for jdk actually is.
>
> IIrc, mine now reads
>
> virtual/jdk dev-java/sun-jdk dev-java/blackdown-jdk
>
> because I manually reversed sun-jdk and blackdown-jdk; otherwise
> everything that relied on virtual/jdk kept trying to install blackdown,
> which I don't want.
>
> And may I ask, when you say that you have sun-jdk unmasked, you mean
> both in package.unmask and in package.keywords, right? Because it not
> being unmasked in package.keywords (as well as disabling the hard mask
> in package.unmask) is the only reason I can think of that only the
> stable version is coming up (since clearly swig, for example, is
> recognizing that sun-jdk is the preferred virtual/jdk as opposed to all
> the other java jdks that are available, but does not recognize the
> unstable versions thereof).
>
> Anyway, a bit confused, but I hope it's helpful



Yes, helpful.  Not yet clarifying.  In fact, it just got worse.  I didn't
know
anything about 'virtuals', and when I look, it seems none of this should
be happening.  Here's the things from virtuals that relate to java:

treat # fgrep 'java
> jdk
> jre' /var/cache/edb/virtuals
virtual/jre dev-java/blackdown-jdk dev-java/blackdown-jre
virtual/jdk dev-java/blackdown-jdk
virtual/java-scheme dev-java/blackdown-jdk dev-java/blackdown-jre
treat #

So why am I getting away with a sun-jdk satisfying this dependency at all?
And how did this happen?  Maybe a thing I chose 'way back when I first
installed and had no idea what any of this stuff did?

Update: after downloading the sun-jdk-1.4... the emerge went through.
I'm up and running, but I'm still:

++ Confused in California

--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 7967 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 86 bytes --]

Oh, and yes, java is ~x86 both in unmask and in keywords.

--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 109 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Jason Stubbs]

On Sunday 01 January 2006 02:57, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> Oh, and yes, java is ~x86 both in unmask and in keywords.

Can you list exactly what sun-jdk lines you have in
/etc/portage/package.{unmask,keywords} please?

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1132 bytes --]

On 12/31/05, Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On Sunday 01 January 2006 02:57, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > Oh, and yes, java is ~x86 both in unmask and in keywords.
>
> Can you list exactly what sun-jdk lines you have in
> /etc/portage/package.{unmask,keywords} please?


Of course.

Oops!!!  I thought I checked this yesterday -- maybe I screwed it up,
but there's nothing in  .unmask, although keywords is fine.
Anyway, after a quick edit, they are:

treat ~ # cat /etc/portage/package.unmask
dev-java/sun-jdk
dev-java/sun-jre-bin
dev-java/java-sdk-docs
treat ~ # cat /etc/portage/package.keywords
dev-java/sun-jdk ~x86
dev-java/sun-jre-bin ~x86
dev-java/java-sdk-docs ~x86
treat ~ #

I'm not sure how to tell which virtuals of the great many in the
/etc/portage
tree I'm using, but I know I have never edited any of that stuff.

Make.conf does not even mention virtual (according to grep -i virtual
/etc/make.conf)

Anyway, I re-emerged the 1.4 Java, and at least my emerges are going
through now.  That was my one bit worry, now resolved.

++ kevin




--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1585 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Jason Stubbs]

On Sunday 01 January 2006 02:39, Holly Bostick wrote:
> And iirc, the virtual is not going to be linked to a hard-masked package
> (or at least it most likely is not atm, or the hard-masked packages are
> listed after the stable packages).
>
> So what I would do is check /var/cache/edb/virtuals and see what the
> listing for jdk actually is.

Ok, you're right off the track here. /var/cache/edb/virtuals hasn't been used 
(at all) since 2.0.50. Packages that provide virtuals are looked up when 
emerge is run and the internal list of those is essentially arbitrary. 
Virtuals listed in /etc/make.profile (and parents) are put after those in 
correct order. Virtuals listed in /etc/portage/profile/virtuals are put at 
the front.

When there is a virtual dependency, these are checked in order for the first 
unmasked package that is able to satisfy the dependency. The fact that 
sun-jdk is being chosen means that it is the first package to have any 
unmasked versions available from the internal list. sun-jdk-1.4* being chosen 
means that sun-jdk-1.5* is still masked.

sun-jdk-1.5* is in package.mask so adding dev-java/sun-jdk (or even 
=dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5*) to /etc/portage/package.unmask should fix that issue. 
It also has a KEYWORDS of "~x86 ~amd64" so adding the same 
to /etc/portage/package.keywords should fix that issue. Beyond that there 
shouldn't be a problem.

--
Jason Stubbs
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Abhay Kedia]

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

On Saturday 31 December 2005 22:47, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>
> The question now seems to be: why doesn't db use Java 1.5?  
>
Yup and it is weird. I have jdk 1.5 installed and when I tried to use +java 
for db it didn't ask me to install older version.

# USE=java emerge -pv sun-jdk db

These are the packages that I would merge, in order:

Calculating dependencies ...done!
[ebuild   Rf  ] dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.06  +X +alsa -browserplugin -doc 
-examples -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 0 kB
[ebuild   R   ] sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap -doc +java* -nocxx -tcltk 
0 kB

Total size of downloads: 0 kB

Can you run the command on your system and make sure which version of jdk you 
are running?

Regards,
Abhay

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

Re: [gentoo-user] emerge going weird

[Kevin O'Gorman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1710 bytes --]

Summary: I'm running java 1.5, I also have 1.4 emerged.

On 12/31/05, Abhay Kedia <abhay.ilugd@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Saturday 31 December 2005 22:47, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> >
> > The question now seems to be: why doesn't db use Java 1.5?
> >
> Yup and it is weird. I have jdk 1.5 installed and when I tried to use
> +java
> for db it didn't ask me to install older version.
>
> # USE=java emerge -pv sun-jdk db
>
> These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies ...done!
> [ebuild   Rf  ] dev-java/sun-jdk-1.5.0.06  +X +alsa -browserplugin -doc
> -examples -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 0 kB
> [ebuild   R   ] sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap -doc +java* -nocxx
> -tcltk
> 0 kB
>
> Total size of downloads: 0 kB
>
> Can you run the command on your system and make sure which version of jdk
> you
> are running?


Sure.  I can even do a bit better.
treat ~ # USE=java emerge -pv sun-jdk db

These are the packages that I would merge, in order:

Calculating dependencies ...done!
[ebuild   Rf  ] dev-java/sun-jdk-1.4.2.10  +X +alsa -browserplugin +doc
-examples -jce +mozilla +nsplugin 0 kB
[ebuild   R   ] sys-libs/db-4.2.52_p2-r1  -bootstrap +doc +java -nocxx
+tcltk 0 kB

Total size of downloads: 0 kB
treat ~ # eix sun-jdk
* dev-java/sun-jdk
     Available versions:  1.2.2.017 1.3.1.16 1.3.1.17 1.4.2.10 [M]1.5.0.06
     Installed:           1.4.2.10 1.5.0.06
     Homepage:            http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/
     Description:         Sun's J2SE Development Kit, version 1.5.0.06


Found 1 matches
treat ~ # java-config --java
/opt/sun-jdk-1.5.0.06/bin/java
treat ~ #







--
Kevin O'Gorman, PhD

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2733 bytes --]