[gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

One of my machines just saw a python-2.7 update and the ebuild was
good enough to remind me to run python-updater, but it didn't suggest
that I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7.

Should this new version python be selected first as the active python
2 version and then run python-updater?

Thanks,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> One of my machines just saw a python-2.7 update and the ebuild was
> good enough to remind me to run python-updater, but it didn't suggest
> that I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7.
>
> Should this new version python be selected first as the active python
> 2 version and then run python-updater?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
>    

And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I 
don't think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Amankwah]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 07:28:35PM -0500, Dale wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > One of my machines just saw a python-2.7 update and the ebuild was
> > good enough to remind me to run python-updater, but it didn't suggest
> > that I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7.
> >
> > Should this new version python be selected first as the active python
> > 2 version and then run python-updater?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
> >    
> 
> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I 
> don't think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)

I run emerge -uvND world && emerge --depclean, the python 2.6 was
auto removed...

I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7, then running
python-updater now..

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Paul Hartman]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I don't
> think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)

I have no trace of python-2.6 on my system at this point and I'm
getting along just fine with 2.7 as my active python.

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Dale]

Paul Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I don't
>> think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
>>      
> I have no trace of python-2.6 on my system at this point and I'm
> getting along just fine with 2.7 as my active python.
>
>    

Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python 2.7?  
You emerged a few packages with no issues so far?  I'm sort of skidish 
on anything other than minor updates to python.  If I mess it up, 
portage may bite me.  o_O  We all know a broken portage is not a good thing.

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 358 bytes --]

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 04:37:15 -0500, Dale wrote:

> Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python
> 2.7?  

I install 2.7 on August 10th and removed 2.6 on October 5th.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Documentation: (n.) a novel sold with software, designed to entertain the
               operator during episodes of bugs or glitches.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 04:37:15 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>> Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python
>> 2.7?
>
> I install 2.7 on August 10th and removed 2.6 on October 5th.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

Do you recollect whether you ran python-updater immediately after the
2.7 emerge, and do you remember whether you set 2.7 as your active
version 2 python version before or after running python-updater?

Thanks,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 785 bytes --]

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:56:20 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > I installed 2.7 on August 10th and removed 2.6 on October 5th.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Neil Bothwick  
> 
> Do you recollect whether you ran python-updater immediately after the
> 2.7 emerge, and do you remember whether you set 2.7 as your active
> version 2 python version before or after running python-updater?

I don't recollect what I did seven days ago, let alone seven months. But
I installed 2.7 on a stable box this morning, set it as active, 't
remove ran python-updater and then depclean removed it. Depclean wouldn't
remove it before running python-updater.

Whether you have to set 2.7 active first, I have no idea, but that order
certainly works.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Death to all fanatics!

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

[gentoo-user] humor: Re: python-2.7 && python-updater

[James]

Neil Bothwick <neil <at> digimed.co.uk> writes:


> > Do you recollect 

> I don't recollect what I did seven days ago, let alone seven months.

Ah ha, TOO FUNNY.....
(old man rolling on the floor
with tears  rolling down his cheeks....)

Still chuckling over this "post 50 year old" prose
hours later.....


Well mine attention span is about 7 hours, at best.

and all shall have a wonderful weekend!

James

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Roman Zilka]

Mark Knecht (Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:56:20 -0700):
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 04:37:15 -0500, Dale wrote:
> >
> >> Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python
> >> 2.7?
> >
> > I install 2.7 on August 10th and removed 2.6 on October 5th.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Neil Bothwick
> 
> Do you recollect whether you ran python-updater immediately after the
> 2.7 emerge, and do you remember whether you set 2.7 as your active
> version 2 python version before or after running python-updater?


My grain of salt of experience from yesterday:
1. emerged python 2.7 (upon a regular daily update)
2. eselect switch to 2.7
3. python-updater (rebuilt about 30 pkgs; all went fine, except pygtk
complained about something apparently minor)
4. re-emerge pygtk, just to be sure, this time it doesn't complain
5. unmerge 2.6
6. there are no traces to be found of python 2.6; everything works

FWIW, it went fine even on an x86 system, where python-2.7.1-r1 is still
~arch.

-rz

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Dale]

Roman Zilka wrote:
> Mark Knecht (Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:56:20 -0700):
>    
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Neil Bothwick<neil@digimed.co.uk>  wrote:
>>      
>>> On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 04:37:15 -0500, Dale wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python
>>>> 2.7?
>>>>          
>>> I install 2.7 on August 10th and removed 2.6 on October 5th.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Neil Bothwick
>>>        
>> Do you recollect whether you ran python-updater immediately after the
>> 2.7 emerge, and do you remember whether you set 2.7 as your active
>> version 2 python version before or after running python-updater?
>>      
>
> My grain of salt of experience from yesterday:
> 1. emerged python 2.7 (upon a regular daily update)
> 2. eselect switch to 2.7
> 3. python-updater (rebuilt about 30 pkgs; all went fine, except pygtk
> complained about something apparently minor)
> 4. re-emerge pygtk, just to be sure, this time it doesn't complain
> 5. unmerge 2.6
> 6. there are no traces to be found of python 2.6; everything works
>
> FWIW, it went fine even on an x86 system, where python-2.7.1-r1 is still
> ~arch.
>
> -rz
>
>    

I'm in the process of doing this too.  So far, so good.  30 out of 53 done.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Paul Hartman]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul Hartman wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I don't
>>> think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
>>>
>>
>> I have no trace of python-2.6 on my system at this point and I'm
>> getting along just fine with 2.7 as my active python.
>>
>>
>
> Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python 2.7?  You
> emerged a few packages with no issues so far?  I'm sort of skidish on
> anything other than minor updates to python.  If I mess it up, portage may
> bite me.  o_O  We all know a broken portage is not a good thing.

For about a week or two, no problems so far.

If you switch to 2.7 then run python-updater before removing 2.6, you
should be fine. If you take a binpkg of it first you can have some
extra peace of mind.

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Dale]

Paul Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Paul Hartman wrote:
>>      
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>    wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I don't
>>>> think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> I have no trace of python-2.6 on my system at this point and I'm
>>> getting along just fine with 2.7 as my active python.
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> Out of curiosity, how long you, or someone else, been using python 2.7?  You
>> emerged a few packages with no issues so far?  I'm sort of skidish on
>> anything other than minor updates to python.  If I mess it up, portage may
>> bite me.  o_O  We all know a broken portage is not a good thing.
>>      
> For about a week or two, no problems so far.
>
> If you switch to 2.7 then run python-updater before removing 2.6, you
> should be fine. If you take a binpkg of it first you can have some
> extra peace of mind.
>
>    

I have buildpkg in make.conf.  I keep a copy of everything installed on 
here, just in case I get to stupid one day.  We all have those days right?

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[KH]

Am 25.03.2011 05:48, schrieb Paul Hartman:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I don't
>> think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
> 
> I have no trace of python-2.6 on my system at this point and I'm
> getting along just fine with 2.7 as my active python.
> 

Hi there,

I do have python-2.7 and python-3.1 emerged. I just took al look in
/usr/lib64/ and I can find trace of python2.4 python2.5 python2.6
python2.7 python3.1 . Are those folders (2.4; 2.5; 2.6) needed anymore?
If no, why are the still there?

Regards kh
-- 
	              	 _
ASCII ribbon campaign	( )
against HTML e-mail	 X
			/ \

ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:22 AM, KH <gentoo-user@konstantinhansen.de> wrote:
> Am 25.03.2011 05:48, schrieb Paul Hartman:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I don't
>>> think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
>>
>> I have no trace of python-2.6 on my system at this point and I'm
>> getting along just fine with 2.7 as my active python.
>>
>
> Hi there,
>
> I do have python-2.7 and python-3.1 emerged. I just took al look in
> /usr/lib64/ and I can find trace of python2.4 python2.5 python2.6
> python2.7 python3.1 . Are those folders (2.4; 2.5; 2.6) needed anymore?
> If no, why are the still there?
>
> Regards kh
<SNIP>

I don't have anything there other than versions of python currently installed:

mark@c2stable ~ $ ls -ld /usr/lib64/pyth*
drwxr-xr-x 21 root root 20480 Feb 26 12:11 /usr/lib64/python2.6
drwxr-xr-x 24 root root 20480 Mar 26 12:08 /usr/lib64/python2.7
drwxr-xr-x 26 root root 20480 Feb 26 12:12 /usr/lib64/python3.1
mark@c2stable ~ $ eselect python list
Available Python interpreters:
  [1]   python2.6
  [2]   python2.7 *
  [3]   python3.1
mark@c2stable ~ $

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Roman Zilka]

KH (Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:22:55 +0200):
> I do have python-2.7 and python-3.1 emerged. I just took al look in
> /usr/lib64/ and I can find trace of python2.4 python2.5 python2.6
> python2.7 python3.1 . Are those folders (2.4; 2.5; 2.6) needed anymore?
> If no, why are the still there?

Is there anything else inside those dirs besides *.pyc and *.pyo files?
If not, it's safe to remove them. *.py[co] are pre-semi-compiled python
programs that python creates upon the first run of a *.py source. Some
1-2 years ago (and before) portage couldn't handle these remnants, as
they didn't actually belong to any package. So if you had unmerged a
package containing a python program which had been run at least once
before the unmerge, the *.py[co] files were left in otherwise empty
directories. Python-2.4 and 2.5 may fall into this period of history.
2.6 is odd.

If the directories contain something more than *.py[co], the story is
different. If there are no files that belong to any package, I believe
it's safe to remove them. If something in there does belong to an
installed package, a re-emerge should solve the problem. If you need an
elegant way of sorting out the chaff, refer to a recent thread on this
mailinglist - "How can I find all "orphaned" files?".

-rz

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[KH]

Am 28.03.2011 17:41, schrieb Roman Zilka:
> KH (Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:22:55 +0200):
>> > I do have python-2.7 and python-3.1 emerged. I just took al look in
>> > /usr/lib64/ and I can find trace of python2.4 python2.5 python2.6
>> > python2.7 python3.1 . Are those folders (2.4; 2.5; 2.6) needed anymore?
>> > If no, why are the still there?
> Is there anything else inside those dirs besides *.pyc and *.pyo files?
> If not, it's safe to remove them.

Hi,
there have been links to files which did not exist anymore. 2.6 is full
with some stuff, but depclean wants to remove something. I'll keep you
up to date.

Regards
KH
-- 
	              	 _
ASCII ribbon campaign	( )
against HTML e-mail	 X
			/ \

ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org

[gentoo-user] Re: python-2.7 && python-updater

[Simon Siemonsma]

I did python-updater as said by the ebuild.
After it I did emerge -a --depclean which removed python 2.6
Boy I was I happy that I have daily backups.
portage did not work anymore.

Changing the active python version before running python-updater gives a lot 
more packages. I did portage by hand. Just don't want to restore a backup 
two times a day.

Dale wrote:

> Mark Knecht wrote:
>> One of my machines just saw a python-2.7 update and the ebuild was
>> good enough to remind me to run python-updater, but it didn't suggest
>> that I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7.
>>
>> Should this new version python be selected first as the active python
>> 2 version and then run python-updater?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mark
>>
>>    
> 
> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I
> don't think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: python-2.7 && python-updater

[Dale]

Simon Siemonsma wrote:
> I did python-updater as said by the ebuild.
> After it I did emerge -a --depclean which removed python 2.6
> Boy I was I happy that I have daily backups.
> portage did not work anymore.
>
> Changing the active python version before running python-updater gives a lot
> more packages. I did portage by hand. Just don't want to restore a backup
> two times a day.
>
>    

I left mine set to 2.6 and it only rebuilt boost.  Then it wanted to 
rebuild it again.  So, I set it to 2.7 then ran python-update and it is 
rebuilding about 50 packages as I type.  Portage seems to be working 
here so not sure why you are having portage breaking. Do you have python 
3.1 installed as well?  I read somewhere, -dev I think, that portage is 
using 3.1.  That may not be correct tho.  Don't go to the bank and try 
to deposit that.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Stéphane Guedon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 953 bytes --]

On Friday 25 March 2011 01:28:35 Dale wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
> > One of my machines just saw a python-2.7 update and the ebuild was
> > good enough to remind me to run python-updater, but it didn't suggest
> > that I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7.
> > 
> > Should this new version python be selected first as the active python
> > 2 version and then run python-updater?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> 
> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I
> don't think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)

I think wicd rely on python 2.6 currently. This is my setup on my laptop ! 
(trying other version break networking with wicd).

-- 
Stéphane Guedon
page web : http://www.22decembre.eu/
carte de visite : http://www.22decembre.eu/downloads/Stephane-Guedon.vcf
clé publique gpg : http://www.22decembre.eu/downloads/Stephane-Guedon.asc

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Grant]

>> > One of my machines just saw a python-2.7 update and the ebuild was
>> > good enough to remind me to run python-updater, but it didn't suggest
>> > that I run eselect python and set the active version to 2.7.
>> >
>> > Should this new version python be selected first as the active python
>> > 2 version and then run python-updater?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Mark
>>
>> And if we should set python to 2.7, should we remove python-2.6?  I
>> don't think we want to break something, portage in particular.  ;-)
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
>
> I think wicd rely on python 2.6 currently. This is my setup on my laptop !
> (trying other version break networking with wicd).

It looks like the latest wicd in portage supports python-2.7:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/333001

- Grant

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 401 bytes --]

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:09:50 +0100, Stéphane Guedon wrote:

> I think wicd rely on python 2.6 currently. This is my setup on my
> laptop ! (trying other version break networking with wicd).

Wicd works fine with 2.7. There was a problem when 2,7 was first
released, but that was fixed in a Wicd update.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If there is light at the end of the tunnel...order more tunnel.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:09:50 +0100, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
>
>> I think wicd rely on python 2.6 currently. This is my setup on my
>> laptop ! (trying other version break networking with wicd).
>
> Wicd works fine with 2.7. There was a problem when 2,7 was first
> released, but that was fixed in a Wicd update.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

I've been through this 2.7 update process on 4 machines now. It seems
on all of my machines the python-updater thing is pretty much always
broken with respect to:

openoffice-bin
boost
emul-linux-x86-baselibs

No matter how many times I rerun things it just wants to keep rebuilding them.

What's weird is that no two machine see exactly the same. Some only
fail with one of those packages, others fail with 2 or 3. Rerunning
phython-updater, or lafilefixer, or revdep-rebuild or removing them
completely and letting emerge -DuN @world reinstall them changes
nothing. They just go on failing the same way.

Waste of time so far...

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1436 bytes --]

On Saturday 26 March 2011 19:10:12 Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:09:50 +0100, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
> >> I think wicd rely on python 2.6 currently. This is my setup on my
> >> laptop ! (trying other version break networking with wicd).
> > 
> > Wicd works fine with 2.7. There was a problem when 2,7 was first
> > released, but that was fixed in a Wicd update.
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Neil Bothwick
> 
> I've been through this 2.7 update process on 4 machines now. It seems
> on all of my machines the python-updater thing is pretty much always
> broken with respect to:
> 
> openoffice-bin
> boost
> emul-linux-x86-baselibs
> 
> No matter how many times I rerun things it just wants to keep rebuilding
> them.
> 
> What's weird is that no two machine see exactly the same. Some only
> fail with one of those packages, others fail with 2 or 3. Rerunning
> phython-updater, or lafilefixer, or revdep-rebuild or removing them
> completely and letting emerge -DuN @world reinstall them changes
> nothing. They just go on failing the same way.
> 
> Waste of time so far...

If you machines are running stable arch there was also this that came up 
today:

revdep-rebuild -v --library 'libmpfr.so.1' -- --ask

Check your elog in case there are some more packages that need revdep-rebuild.

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday 26 March 2011 19:10:12 Mark Knecht wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:09:50 +0100, Stéphane Guedon wrote:
>> >> I think wicd rely on python 2.6 currently. This is my setup on my
>> >> laptop ! (trying other version break networking with wicd).
>> >
>> > Wicd works fine with 2.7. There was a problem when 2,7 was first
>> > released, but that was fixed in a Wicd update.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Neil Bothwick
>>
>> I've been through this 2.7 update process on 4 machines now. It seems
>> on all of my machines the python-updater thing is pretty much always
>> broken with respect to:
>>
>> openoffice-bin
>> boost
>> emul-linux-x86-baselibs
>>
>> No matter how many times I rerun things it just wants to keep rebuilding
>> them.
>>
>> What's weird is that no two machine see exactly the same. Some only
>> fail with one of those packages, others fail with 2 or 3. Rerunning
>> phython-updater, or lafilefixer, or revdep-rebuild or removing them
>> completely and letting emerge -DuN @world reinstall them changes
>> nothing. They just go on failing the same way.
>>
>> Waste of time so far...
>
> If you machines are running stable arch there was also this that came up
> today:
>
> revdep-rebuild -v --library 'libmpfr.so.1' -- --ask
>
> Check your elog in case there are some more packages that need revdep-rebuild.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mick
>

I had nothing linked to libmpfr.so.1 so that wasn't the root cause/

In my case it seems to be driven by bugs like this:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=360425

Seems the only thing to do it just wait for devs to fix it. (And
wonder why something like python-2.7 gets released as stable with
stuff like this hanging about....)

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Bill Longman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1587 bytes --]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I've been through this 2.7 update process on 4 machines now. It seems
>> on all of my machines the python-updater thing is pretty much always
>> broken with respect to:
>>
>> openoffice-bin
>> boost
>> emul-linux-x86-baselibs
>>
>> No matter how many times I rerun things it just wants to keep rebuilding
>> them.
>>
>> What's weird is that no two machine see exactly the same. Some only
>> fail with one of those packages, others fail with 2 or 3. Rerunning
>> phython-updater, or lafilefixer, or revdep-rebuild or removing them
>> completely and letting emerge -DuN @world reinstall them changes
>> nothing. They just go on failing the same way.
>>
>> Waste of time so far...
>
> If you machines are running stable arch there was also this that came up
> today:
>
> revdep-rebuild -v --library 'libmpfr.so.1' -- --ask
>
> Check your elog in case there are some more packages that need
revdep-rebuild.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Mick
>

I had nothing linked to libmpfr.so.1 so that wasn't the root cause/
>
> In my case it seems to be driven by bugs like this:
>
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=360425
>
> Seems the only thing to do it just wait for devs to fix it. (And
> wonder why something like python-2.7 gets released as stable with
> stuff like this hanging about....)
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
>
The libmpfr change bit me on one of my amd64 machines. I did the
revdep-rebuild on the library and then gcc was broken. I recompiled
everything but still sandbox and gcc won't compile.

-- 
Bill Longman

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2240 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Bill Longman <bill.longman@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>> I had nothing linked to libmpfr.so.1 so that wasn't the root cause/
>>
>> In my case it seems to be driven by bugs like this:
>>
>> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=360425
>>
>> Seems the only thing to do it just wait for devs to fix it. (And
>> wonder why something like python-2.7 gets released as stable with
>> stuff like this hanging about....)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mark
>>
>
> The libmpfr change bit me on one of my amd64 machines. I did the
> revdep-rebuild on the library and then gcc was broken. I recompiled
> everything but still sandbox and gcc won't compile.
> --
> Bill Longman
>

Bill,
   I got bit by the sandbox/gcc problem yesterday. In my case, on a
machine with a KDE profile && after reviewing Gentoo bug reports, I
did the following:

eselect profile set 1
cd /lib
ln -s ../lib32/ld-linux.so.2 .
emerge sandbox
emerge --sync
emerge glibc
emerge @preserved-rebuild
eselect profile set 4
emerge -e -j9 @system

and an hour later I was back to functional without those messages
about not being able to build C programs, etc.

I don't suggest ANY of that is understood by the likes of me but it
did seem to solve the problem which was (apparently) wrapped around
some sort of missing link which allows 64-bit machines to run 32-bit
programs. (Or that's about all I could get out of what I read....)

Hope this helps, and hoping someone more knowledgable than I chimes in
with what I should have/could have done to do this more easily.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2142 bytes --]

On Saturday 26 March 2011 20:53:50 Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Bill Longman <bill.longman@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> 
wrote:
> <SNIP>
> 
> >> I had nothing linked to libmpfr.so.1 so that wasn't the root cause/
> >> 
> >> In my case it seems to be driven by bugs like this:
> >> 
> >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=360425
> >> 
> >> Seems the only thing to do it just wait for devs to fix it. (And
> >> wonder why something like python-2.7 gets released as stable with
> >> stuff like this hanging about....)
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Mark
> > 
> > The libmpfr change bit me on one of my amd64 machines. I did the
> > revdep-rebuild on the library and then gcc was broken. I recompiled
> > everything but still sandbox and gcc won't compile.
> > --
> > Bill Longman
> 
> Bill,
>    I got bit by the sandbox/gcc problem yesterday. In my case, on a
> machine with a KDE profile && after reviewing Gentoo bug reports, I
> did the following:
> 
> eselect profile set 1
> cd /lib
> ln -s ../lib32/ld-linux.so.2 .
> emerge sandbox
> emerge --sync
> emerge glibc
> emerge @preserved-rebuild
> eselect profile set 4
> emerge -e -j9 @system
> 
> and an hour later I was back to functional without those messages
> about not being able to build C programs, etc.
> 
> I don't suggest ANY of that is understood by the likes of me but it
> did seem to solve the problem which was (apparently) wrapped around
> some sort of missing link which allows 64-bit machines to run 32-bit
> programs. (Or that's about all I could get out of what I read....)
> 
> Hope this helps, and hoping someone more knowledgable than I chimes in
> with what I should have/could have done to do this more easily.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark

I had a problem with it too (gcc would not compile) but that was because I was 
trying to emerge everything at the same time.  I slowed down, finished with 
the libmpfr revdep-rebuild and then run python updater, switched to python-2.7 
and run revdep-rebuild again.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 548 bytes --]

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 12:10:12 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

> I've been through this 2.7 update process on 4 machines now. It seems
> on all of my machines the python-updater thing is pretty much always
> broken with respect to:
> 
> openoffice-bin
> boost
> emul-linux-x86-baselibs

Aren't those manually added to the list by python-updater? So you need to
use -dmanual to prevent further rebuilding of them.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

There are 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary
notation and those who don't.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 12:10:12 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> I've been through this 2.7 update process on 4 machines now. It seems
>> on all of my machines the python-updater thing is pretty much always
>> broken with respect to:
>>
>> openoffice-bin
>> boost
>> emul-linux-x86-baselibs
>
> Aren't those manually added to the list by python-updater? So you need to
> use -dmanual to prevent further rebuilding of them.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

I guess I'm not clear on the use of 'manual' here. They are
automatically added. If they are correctly rebuilt then they shouldn't
need to be added a second time, correct? However they are. (Over and
over...)

Basically, it is my understanding that if everything is correctly
updated then on the second pass it should say there's nothing to do,
right?

I mean, I can add anything to a list of things not to build, but I
don't know why I'd add them vs just letting it run and telling me it's
doing them a 2nd/3rd time and feeling the job must be done.

I assume there is stuff in these packages that is somehow hard linked
to python-2.6 libraries or something and one of these days that will
get fixed?

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Adam Carter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1073 bytes --]

> I guess I'm not clear on the use of 'manual' here. They are
> automatically added. If they are correctly rebuilt then they shouldn't
> need to be added a second time, correct? However they are. (Over and
> over...)
>
> Basically, it is my understanding that if everything is correctly
> updated then on the second pass it should say there's nothing to do,
> right?
>

No

>
> I mean, I can add anything to a list of things not to build, but I
> don't know why I'd add them vs just letting it run and telling me it's
> doing them a 2nd/3rd time and feeling the job must be done.
>
> I assume there is stuff in these packages that is somehow hard linked
> to python-2.6 libraries or something and one of these days that will
> get fixed?
>
> - Mark
>
>
RTFM :)

     manual
           python-updater has a list of packages that are known to break
           by Python upgrades but can't be determined by methods specified
           above. This check can be disabled if you're sure you've rebuilt
           the package once and it's OK now.
           Enabled by default.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1553 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1267 bytes --]

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 14:33:14 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > Aren't those manually added to the list by python-updater? So you
> > need to use -dmanual to prevent further rebuilding of them.

> I guess I'm not clear on the use of 'manual' here.

It's explained in the manual page (sorry :)

Manual means manually added to the list by python-updater, rather than
using any sort of detection.

> They are
> automatically added. If they are correctly rebuilt then they shouldn't
> need to be added a second time, correct? However they are. (Over and
> over...)
> 
> Basically, it is my understanding that if everything is correctly
> updated then on the second pass it should say there's nothing to do,
> right?

If it can determine that that's the case, yes. Packages are added
manually because python-updater cannot tell for sure whether they should
be rebuilt this time. That's certainly true for ooo-bin and boost, lnd
prevented by -dmanual. app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs seems
different, I've just been hit by this one, so I ignored it after the
first build. I suspect a bug has already been reported.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If at first you don't succeed, you'll get a lot of free advice from
folks who didn't succeed either.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 14:33:14 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> > Aren't those manually added to the list by python-updater? So you
>> > need to use -dmanual to prevent further rebuilding of them.
>
>> I guess I'm not clear on the use of 'manual' here.
>
> It's explained in the manual page (sorry :)
>
> Manual means manually added to the list by python-updater, rather than
> using any sort of detection.
>

OK, I won't bother with the many definitions of the word manual or how
that effects the conversation from my end 'cause that don't matter
much to Linux man-page writers. ;-) However I'm still failing to see
the interest in this as it only removes 1 or 4 packages (boost) that
I've rebuilt multiple time. 75% of the failures still fail using
-dmanual.

c2stable ~ # python-updater -p -dmanual
 * Starting Python Updater...
 * Main active version of Python:  2.7
 * Active version of Python 2:     2.7
 * Active version of Python 3:     3.1
 *   Adding to list: app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
 *   Adding to list: app-emulation/virtualbox:0
 *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
 *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
 * emerge -Dv1 --keep-going -p app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
app-emulation/virtualbox:0 app-office/openoffice-bin:0
app-office/openoffice-bin:0

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

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R    ] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20110129
USE="-development" 0 kB
[ebuild   R    ] app-office/openoffice-bin-3.3.0  USE="-gnome -java"
LINGUAS="en -ar -as -ast -be_BY -bg -bn -ca -ca_XV -cs -da -de -dz -el
-en_GB -eo -es -et -eu -fi -fr -ga -gl -gu -he -hi -hu -id -is -it -ja
-ka -km -kn -ko -ku -lt -lv -mk -ml -mr -my -nb -nl -nn -oc -om -or
-pa_IN -pl -pt -pt_BR -ro -ru -sh -si -sk -sl -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr
-ug -uk -uz -vi -zh_CN -zh_TW" 0 kB
[ebuild   R   ~] app-emulation/virtualbox-4.0.4-r1  USE="additions
alsa opengl python qt4 sdk -doc -extensions -headless -java
-pulseaudio -vboxwebsrv -vnc" 0 kB

Total: 3 packages (3 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 0 kB
c2stable ~ # python-updater -p
 * Starting Python Updater...
 * Main active version of Python:  2.7
 * Active version of Python 2:     2.7
 * Active version of Python 3:     3.1
 *   Adding to list: app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
 *   Adding to list: app-emulation/virtualbox:0
 *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
 *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
 *   Adding to list: dev-libs/boost:1.42
 *     check: manual [Added to list manually, see CHECKS in manpage
for more information.]
 * emerge -Dv1 --keep-going -p app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
app-emulation/virtualbox:0 app-office/openoffice-bin:0
app-office/openoffice-bin:0 dev-libs/boost:1.42

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

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R    ] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20110129
USE="-development" 0 kB
[ebuild   R    ] dev-libs/boost-1.42.0-r2  USE="eselect python -debug
-doc -icu -mpi -static-libs -test -tools" 0 kB
[ebuild   R    ] app-office/openoffice-bin-3.3.0  USE="-gnome -java"
LINGUAS="en -ar -as -ast -be_BY -bg -bn -ca -ca_XV -cs -da -de -dz -el
-en_GB -eo -es -et -eu -fi -fr -ga -gl -gu -he -hi -hu -id -is -it -ja
-ka -km -kn -ko -ku -lt -lv -mk -ml -mr -my -nb -nl -nn -oc -om -or
-pa_IN -pl -pt -pt_BR -ro -ru -sh -si -sk -sl -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr
-ug -uk -uz -vi -zh_CN -zh_TW" 0 kB
[ebuild   R   ~] app-emulation/virtualbox-4.0.4-r1  USE="additions
alsa opengl python qt4 sdk -doc -extensions -headless -java
-pulseaudio -vboxwebsrv -vnc" 0 kB

Total: 4 packages (4 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 0 kB
c2stable ~ #



>> They are
>> automatically added. If they are correctly rebuilt then they shouldn't
>> need to be added a second time, correct? However they are. (Over and
>> over...)
>>
>> Basically, it is my understanding that if everything is correctly
>> updated then on the second pass it should say there's nothing to do,
>> right?
>
> If it can determine that that's the case, yes. Packages are added
> manually because python-updater cannot tell for sure whether they should
> be rebuilt this time. That's certainly true for ooo-bin and boost, lnd
> prevented by -dmanual. app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs seems
> different, I've just been hit by this one, so I ignored it after the
> first build. I suspect a bug has already been reported.
>

Fair enough. I'm also seeing Virtualbox as shown above.

Thanks for the info. I've done the python-updater steps too many times
now and from now on will basically do it just once and after that take
what it says with a grain of salt.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Jacques Montier]

Le 27/03/2011 17:26, Mark Knecht a écrit :
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 14:33:14 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
>>
>>>> Aren't those manually added to the list by python-updater? So you
>>>> need to use -dmanual to prevent further rebuilding of them.
>>> I guess I'm not clear on the use of 'manual' here.
>> It's explained in the manual page (sorry :)
>>
>> Manual means manually added to the list by python-updater, rather than
>> using any sort of detection.
>>
> OK, I won't bother with the many definitions of the word manual or how
> that effects the conversation from my end 'cause that don't matter
> much to Linux man-page writers. ;-) However I'm still failing to see
> the interest in this as it only removes 1 or 4 packages (boost) that
> I've rebuilt multiple time. 75% of the failures still fail using
> -dmanual.
>
> c2stable ~ # python-updater -p -dmanual
>  * Starting Python Updater...
>  * Main active version of Python:  2.7
>  * Active version of Python 2:     2.7
>  * Active version of Python 3:     3.1
>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/virtualbox:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>  * emerge -Dv1 --keep-going -p app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
> app-emulation/virtualbox:0 app-office/openoffice-bin:0
> app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild   R    ] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20110129
> USE="-development" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R    ] app-office/openoffice-bin-3.3.0  USE="-gnome -java"
> LINGUAS="en -ar -as -ast -be_BY -bg -bn -ca -ca_XV -cs -da -de -dz -el
> -en_GB -eo -es -et -eu -fi -fr -ga -gl -gu -he -hi -hu -id -is -it -ja
> -ka -km -kn -ko -ku -lt -lv -mk -ml -mr -my -nb -nl -nn -oc -om -or
> -pa_IN -pl -pt -pt_BR -ro -ru -sh -si -sk -sl -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr
> -ug -uk -uz -vi -zh_CN -zh_TW" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R   ~] app-emulation/virtualbox-4.0.4-r1  USE="additions
> alsa opengl python qt4 sdk -doc -extensions -headless -java
> -pulseaudio -vboxwebsrv -vnc" 0 kB
>
> Total: 3 packages (3 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 0 kB
> c2stable ~ # python-updater -p
>  * Starting Python Updater...
>  * Main active version of Python:  2.7
>  * Active version of Python 2:     2.7
>  * Active version of Python 3:     3.1
>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/virtualbox:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>  *   Adding to list: dev-libs/boost:1.42
>  *     check: manual [Added to list manually, see CHECKS in manpage
> for more information.]
>  * emerge -Dv1 --keep-going -p app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
> app-emulation/virtualbox:0 app-office/openoffice-bin:0
> app-office/openoffice-bin:0 dev-libs/boost:1.42
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild   R    ] app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs-20110129
> USE="-development" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R    ] dev-libs/boost-1.42.0-r2  USE="eselect python -debug
> -doc -icu -mpi -static-libs -test -tools" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R    ] app-office/openoffice-bin-3.3.0  USE="-gnome -java"
> LINGUAS="en -ar -as -ast -be_BY -bg -bn -ca -ca_XV -cs -da -de -dz -el
> -en_GB -eo -es -et -eu -fi -fr -ga -gl -gu -he -hi -hu -id -is -it -ja
> -ka -km -kn -ko -ku -lt -lv -mk -ml -mr -my -nb -nl -nn -oc -om -or
> -pa_IN -pl -pt -pt_BR -ro -ru -sh -si -sk -sl -sr -sv -ta -te -th -tr
> -ug -uk -uz -vi -zh_CN -zh_TW" 0 kB
> [ebuild   R   ~] app-emulation/virtualbox-4.0.4-r1  USE="additions
> alsa opengl python qt4 sdk -doc -extensions -headless -java
> -pulseaudio -vboxwebsrv -vnc" 0 kB
>
> Total: 4 packages (4 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 0 kB
> c2stable ~ #
>
>
>
>>> They are
>>> automatically added. If they are correctly rebuilt then they shouldn't
>>> need to be added a second time, correct? However they are. (Over and
>>> over...)
>>>
>>> Basically, it is my understanding that if everything is correctly
>>> updated then on the second pass it should say there's nothing to do,
>>> right?
>> If it can determine that that's the case, yes. Packages are added
>> manually because python-updater cannot tell for sure whether they should
>> be rebuilt this time. That's certainly true for ooo-bin and boost, lnd
>> prevented by -dmanual. app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs seems
>> different, I've just been hit by this one, so I ignored it after the
>> first build. I suspect a bug has already been reported.
>>
> Fair enough. I'm also seeing Virtualbox as shown above.
>
> Thanks for the info. I've done the python-updater steps too many times
> now and from now on will basically do it just once and after that take
> what it says with a grain of salt.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
Hi,

I had the same problem. So i had to run
python-updater -dmanual -dpylibdir -dPYTHON_ABIS -dshared_linking
-dstatic_linking
* Starting Python Updater...
* Main active version of Python: 2.7
* Active version of Python 2: 2.7
* Active version of Python 3: 3.1
* No packages need to be reinstalled.

--
Jacques

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1444 bytes --]

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 08:26:10 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > Manual means manually added to the list by python-updater, rather than
> > using any sort of detection.
> >  
> 
> OK, I won't bother with the many definitions of the word manual or how
> that effects the conversation from my end 'cause that don't matter
> much to Linux man-page writers. ;-)

I agree that describing an automated default as manual is somewhat less
than intuitive...

> However I'm still failing to see
> the interest in this as it only removes 1 or 4 packages (boost) that
> I've rebuilt multiple time. 75% of the failures still fail using
> -dmanual.
> 
> c2stable ~ # python-updater -p -dmanual
>  * Starting Python Updater...
>  * Main active version of Python:  2.7
>  * Active version of Python 2:     2.7
>  * Active version of Python 3:     3.1
>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/virtualbox:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0

I've also been hit by the first, as I think I mentioned. As for the other
two, re-emerging a binary package won't help at all, because it's a binary
package, so you unpack it rather than rebuild it. That's more a problem
with using binary packages on a source distro than a fault of
python-updater itself.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Set phasers to extreme itching!

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

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Mark Knecht]

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 08:26:10 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> > Manual means manually added to the list by python-updater, rather than
>> > using any sort of detection.
>> >
>>
>> OK, I won't bother with the many definitions of the word manual or how
>> that effects the conversation from my end 'cause that don't matter
>> much to Linux man-page writers. ;-)
>
> I agree that describing an automated default as manual is somewhat less
> than intuitive...
>

Yep. Generously I'd say they meant something like 'from a manual of
known apps', etc., but clearly other words like 'list' might have been
more intuitive, at least to me.

>> However I'm still failing to see
>> the interest in this as it only removes 1 or 4 packages (boost) that
>> I've rebuilt multiple time. 75% of the failures still fail using
>> -dmanual.
>>
>> c2stable ~ # python-updater -p -dmanual
>>  * Starting Python Updater...
>>  * Main active version of Python:  2.7
>>  * Active version of Python 2:     2.7
>>  * Active version of Python 3:     3.1
>>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/emul-linux-x86-baselibs:0
>>  *   Adding to list: app-emulation/virtualbox:0
>>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>>  *   Adding to list: app-office/openoffice-bin:0
>
> I've also been hit by the first, as I think I mentioned. As for the other
> two, re-emerging a binary package won't help at all, because it's a binary
> package, so you unpack it rather than rebuild it. That's more a problem
> with using binary packages on a source distro than a fault of
> python-updater itself.

Understood and agreed. For OO I couldn't quite get up the interest to
start building from scratch though. Something like 450MB of things to
download and then what, do it again in a week or two? Not worth it for
my needs.

Thanks for all the insights. I do appreciate your inputs.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 955 bytes --]

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 12:50:57 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:

> > I've also been hit by the first, as I think I mentioned. As for the
> > other two, re-emerging a binary package won't help at all, because
> > it's a binary package, so you unpack it rather than rebuild it.
> > That's more a problem with using binary packages on a source distro
> > than a fault of python-updater itself.  
> 
> Understood and agreed. For OO I couldn't quite get up the interest to
> start building from scratch though. Something like 450MB of things to
> download and then what, do it again in a week or two? Not worth it for
> my needs.

That shouldn't be a problem with the release frequency of OOo, with LO
that's more of a problem.

At least with OOo/LO you get a better program for the effort of
compiling, the open source version of VirtualBox is crippled :(


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] python-2.7 && python-updater

[Adam Carter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 798 bytes --]

>
> > Understood and agreed. For OO I couldn't quite get up the interest to
> > start building from scratch though. Something like 450MB of things to
> > download and then what, do it again in a week or two? Not worth it for
> > my needs.
>

Did you delete the source out of your /usr/portage/distfiles directory? If
not, it will still be there and you wont have to download it again.


> That shouldn't be a problem with the release frequency of OOo, with LO
> that's more of a problem.
>
> At least with OOo/LO you get a better program for the effort of
> compiling, the open source version of VirtualBox is crippled :(
>
> FWIW I hit an unresolved build bug in OO (which had previously built ok, so
was triggered by an update in another package), so I switched to LO which
didnt have the issue.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1227 bytes --]