[gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

I've had this come up a few times over the last few weeks. Every time
I've done the command the emerge has failed somewhere along the way.

Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?

Granted, I have no way of knowing whether revdep-rebuild would have
failed or not failed so maybe it's an issue with the quality of what's
in portage these days but I'm not grasping why things are getting to
be more work for fewer good results.

Thanks,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Graham Murray]

"Mark Knecht" <markknecht@gmail.com> writes:

> Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
> that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?

It allows the affected packages to continue working until the rebuild is
done. With the 'old' revdep-rebuild, a program using a library whose
version was incremented by an upgrade could not be started (or would
fail) until it was rebuilt to use the newer library version. With the
'new' @preserved-rebuild, the old version of the library is not actually
removed until all the dependent packages are rebuilt. 

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Graham Murray <graham@gmurray.org.uk> wrote:
> "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
>> that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?
>
> It allows the affected packages to continue working until the rebuild is
> done. With the 'old' revdep-rebuild, a program using a library whose
> version was incremented by an upgrade could not be started (or would
> fail) until it was rebuilt to use the newer library version. With the
> 'new' @preserved-rebuild, the old version of the library is not actually
> removed until all the dependent packages are rebuilt.
>
>

Thanks Graham. That *sounds* like it should be of value.

I guess then that the constant messages about doing an emerge
@preserved-rebuild aren't necessarily to be followed, or at least not
worried about if they fail as whatever program needs the libraries
still has the old versions?

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 554 bytes --]

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:51:32 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> I guess then that the constant messages about doing an emerge
> @preserved-rebuild aren't necessarily to be followed, or at least not
> worried about if they fail as whatever program needs the libraries
> still has the old versions?

They should be followed and the problem fixed. Not only is it untidy
leaving old copies of libraries around but, as Volker says, the old
versions can prevent revdep-rebuild working correctly.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Accordion: a bagpipe with pleats.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:51:32 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> I guess then that the constant messages about doing an emerge
>> @preserved-rebuild aren't necessarily to be followed, or at least not
>> worried about if they fail as whatever program needs the libraries
>> still has the old versions?
>
> They should be followed and the problem fixed. Not only is it untidy
> leaving old copies of libraries around but, as Volker says, the old
> versions can prevent revdep-rebuild working correctly.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

Right now I'm seeing that @preserved-rebuild and revdep-rebuild want
to do different things. revdep-rebuild is rebuilding nss which may or
may not fail. @preserved-rebuild wanted to rebuild eveolution which
did fail.

I'm somewhat unclear as to how to proceed. Using emerge is currently
telling me I should do an emerge -e world to fully take advantage of
new features in portage-2.2. I guess that message wouldn't be there
unless it was really a good thing to do but that's a lot of downtime
for me.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[James Ausmus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1497 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:51:32 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> >
> >> I guess then that the constant messages about doing an emerge
> >> @preserved-rebuild aren't necessarily to be followed, or at least not
> >> worried about if they fail as whatever program needs the libraries
> >> still has the old versions?
> >
> > They should be followed and the problem fixed. Not only is it untidy
> > leaving old copies of libraries around but, as Volker says, the old
> > versions can prevent revdep-rebuild working correctly.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Neil Bothwick
>
> Right now I'm seeing that @preserved-rebuild and revdep-rebuild want
> to do different things. revdep-rebuild is rebuilding nss which may or
> may not fail. @preserved-rebuild wanted to rebuild eveolution which
> did fail.
>

I would suggest performing the revdep-rebuild first, then doing the
@preserved-rebuild - if revdep-rebuild is coming up with broken packages,
those broken packages can actually prevent other packages (such as
evolution) from building properly.

-James



>
> I'm somewhat unclear as to how to proceed. Using emerge is currently
> telling me I should do an emerge -e world to fully take advantage of
> new features in portage-2.2. I guess that message wouldn't be there
> unless it was really a good thing to do but that's a lot of downtime
> for me.
>
> - Mark
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2180 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:07 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>>
>> Right now I'm seeing that @preserved-rebuild and revdep-rebuild want
>> to do different things. revdep-rebuild is rebuilding nss which may or
>> may not fail. @preserved-rebuild wanted to rebuild eveolution which
>> did fail.
>
> I would suggest performing the revdep-rebuild first, then doing the
> @preserved-rebuild - if revdep-rebuild is coming up with broken packages,
> those broken packages can actually prevent other packages (such as
> evolution) from building properly.
> -James
>

We'll see how it works out. I've done the revdep-rebuild.
@preserved-rebuild failed last night but is running again. If it
continues to fail I'll file a bug report.

I don't use evolution. It's just caught up in the emerge gnome stuff
and the gnome-light construct stopped working a while back so
evolution has been there not causing trouble (other than build
time/disk space) until now.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:07 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:
> <SNIP>
>>>
>>> Right now I'm seeing that @preserved-rebuild and revdep-rebuild want
>>> to do different things. revdep-rebuild is rebuilding nss which may or
>>> may not fail. @preserved-rebuild wanted to rebuild eveolution which
>>> did fail.
>>
>> I would suggest performing the revdep-rebuild first, then doing the
>> @preserved-rebuild - if revdep-rebuild is coming up with broken packages,
>> those broken packages can actually prevent other packages (such as
>> evolution) from building properly.
>> -James
>>
>
> We'll see how it works out. I've done the revdep-rebuild.
> @preserved-rebuild failed last night but is running again. If it
> continues to fail I'll file a bug report.
>
> I don't use evolution. It's just caught up in the emerge gnome stuff
> and the gnome-light construct stopped working a while back so
> evolution has been there not causing trouble (other than build
> time/disk space) until now.
>
> - Mark
>
And the emerge of evolution failed as it did last night so in this
case the revdep-rebuild didn't matter.

Interesting that the evolution build fails for the package name (nss)
that revdep-rebuild just rebuilt:

/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
/usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
`FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
/usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
/usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
`NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....

and previously completed:

emerge --oneshot dev-libs/nss:0

Would there be any requirements to exit the terminal and log in again
(or source something) after the revdep-rebuild and before the emerge
@preserved-rebuild step?

I'm bothered that it seems to be asking for NSS_3.4 when all I see in
portage are 3.1/3.2 versions...

lightning ~ # eix -I dev-libs/nss
[I] dev-libs/nss
     Available versions:  3.11.9-r1 3.12.2_rc1 {utils}
     Installed versions:  3.12.2_rc1(10:00:56 AM 01/08/2009)(-utils)
     Homepage:            http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/
     Description:         Mozilla's Network Security Services library
that implements PKI support

lightning ~ #
lightning ~ # emerge -pv evolution

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

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R   ] mail-client/evolution-2.22.3.1  USE="crypt dbus hal
ipv6 ldap spell ssl -debug -kerberos -krb4 -mono -networkmanager -nntp
-pda -profile" 0 kB

Total: 1 package (1 reinstall), Size of downloads: 0 kB
lightning ~ #

Thanks,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[James Ausmus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3510 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:07 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > <SNIP>
> >>>
> >>> Right now I'm seeing that @preserved-rebuild and revdep-rebuild want
> >>> to do different things. revdep-rebuild is rebuilding nss which may or
> >>> may not fail. @preserved-rebuild wanted to rebuild eveolution which
> >>> did fail.
> >>
> >> I would suggest performing the revdep-rebuild first, then doing the
> >> @preserved-rebuild - if revdep-rebuild is coming up with broken
> packages,
> >> those broken packages can actually prevent other packages (such as
> >> evolution) from building properly.
> >> -James
> >>
> >
> > We'll see how it works out. I've done the revdep-rebuild.
> > @preserved-rebuild failed last night but is running again. If it
> > continues to fail I'll file a bug report.
> >
> > I don't use evolution. It's just caught up in the emerge gnome stuff
> > and the gnome-light construct stopped working a while back so
> > evolution has been there not causing trouble (other than build
> > time/disk space) until now.
> >
> > - Mark
> >
> And the emerge of evolution failed as it did last night so in this
> case the revdep-rebuild didn't matter.
>
> Interesting that the evolution build fails for the package name (nss)
> that revdep-rebuild just rebuilt:
>
>
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>

Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the issue is the
"warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11, not
found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it, and it is
owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there. What does
a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?

-James




>
> and previously completed:
>
> emerge --oneshot dev-libs/nss:0
>
> Would there be any requirements to exit the terminal and log in again
> (or source something) after the revdep-rebuild and before the emerge
> @preserved-rebuild step?
>
> I'm bothered that it seems to be asking for NSS_3.4 when all I see in
> portage are 3.1/3.2 versions...
>
> lightning ~ # eix -I dev-libs/nss
> [I] dev-libs/nss
>     Available versions:  3.11.9-r1 3.12.2_rc1 {utils}
>     Installed versions:  3.12.2_rc1(10:00:56 AM 01/08/2009)(-utils)
>     Homepage:            http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/pki/nss/
>     Description:         Mozilla's Network Security Services library
> that implements PKI support
>
> lightning ~ #
> lightning ~ # emerge -pv evolution
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild   R   ] mail-client/evolution-2.22.3.1  USE="crypt dbus hal
> ipv6 ldap spell ssl -debug -kerberos -krb4 -mono -networkmanager -nntp
> -pda -profile" 0 kB
>
> Total: 1 package (1 reinstall), Size of downloads: 0 kB
> lightning ~ #
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4709 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:

>>
>>
>> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
>> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
>> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
>> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
>> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
>> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
>> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>
> Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the issue is the
> "warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11, not
> found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it, and it is
> owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there. What does
> a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?
> -James
>

Version 12 apparently:

lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*
/usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn.a     /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so
/usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.chk  /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so.12
lightning ~ #

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[James Ausmus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1570 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
> >> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
> >> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
> >> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> >
> > Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the issue is
> the
> > "warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11, not
> > found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it, and it
> is
> > owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there. What
> does
> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?
> > -James
> >
>
> Version 12 apparently:
>
> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*
> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn.a     /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so
> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.chk  /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so.12
> lightning ~ #
>

Very interesting - so you have the Evolution build using the .11 version of
libnss3, but you have ther .12 version of libsoftkn3 - what do you see from
a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2126 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
>> >> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
>> >> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
>> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> >> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
>> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> >> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
>> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> >> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
>> >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>> >> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
>> >> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>> >
>> > Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the issue is
>> > the
>> > "warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11, not
>> > found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it, and
>> > it is
>> > owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there. What
>> > does
>> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?
>> > -James
>> >
>>
>> Version 12 apparently:
>>
>> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*
>> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn.a     /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so
>> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.chk  /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so.12
>> lightning ~ #
>
> Very interesting - so you have the Evolution build using the .11 version of
> libnss3, but you have ther .12 version of libsoftkn3 - what do you see from
> a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
>
lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
/usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
lightning ~ #

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[James Ausmus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2098 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
> >> >> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
> >> >> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> >> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> >> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> >> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> >> >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >> >> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
> >> >> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> >> >
> >> > Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the issue
> is
> >> > the
> >> > "warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
> not
> >> > found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it, and
> >> > it is
> >> > owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there. What
> >> > does
> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?
> >> > -James
> >> >
> >>
> >> Version 12 apparently:
> >>
> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*
> >> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn.a     /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so
> >> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.chk  /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so.12
> >> lightning ~ #
> >
> > Very interesting - so you have the Evolution build using the .11 version
> of
> > libnss3, but you have ther .12 version of libsoftkn3 - what do you see
> from
> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
> >
> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
>  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
> lightning ~ #
>

Aha! And which of the versioned .so's is libnss3.so linking to?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3075 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:45 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
>> >> >> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
>> >> >> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
>> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> >> >> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
>> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> >> >> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
>> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
>> >> >> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
>> >> >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>> >> >> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
>> >> >> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>> >> >
>> >> > Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the issue
>> >> > is
>> >> > the
>> >> > "warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
>> >> > not
>> >> > found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it,
>> >> > and
>> >> > it is
>> >> > owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there.
>> >> > What
>> >> > does
>> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?
>> >> > -James
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Version 12 apparently:
>> >>
>> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*
>> >> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn.a     /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so
>> >> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.chk  /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so.12
>> >> lightning ~ #
>> >
>> > Very interesting - so you have the Evolution build using the .11 version
>> > of
>> > libnss3, but you have ther .12 version of libsoftkn3 - what do you see
>> > from
>> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
>> >
>> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
>> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
>>  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
>> lightning ~ #
>
> Aha! And which of the versioned .so's is libnss3.so linking to?
>
lightning ~ # ls -l /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      13 2009-01-08 10:00
/usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so -> libnss3.so.12
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  560376 2008-11-25 17:02 /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1337104 2009-01-08 10:00 /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
lightning ~ #

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[James Ausmus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3144 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:45 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:36 AM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, James Ausmus <
> james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
> >> >> >> warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by
> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
> >> >> >> not found (try using -rpath or -rpath-link)
> >> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> >> >> `FC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> >> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> >> >> `NSC_ModuleDBFunc@NSS_3.4'
> >> >> >> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11: undefined reference to
> >> >> >> `NSC_GetFunctionList@NSS_3.4'
> >> >> >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> >> >> >> make[4]: *** [contact-print-test] Error 1
> >> >> >> make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hmm, and the mystery deepens... It looks like the source of the
> issue
> >> >> > is
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > "warning: libsoftokn3.so.11, needed by
> /usr/lib64/nss/libnss3.so.11,
> >> >> > not
> >> >> > found" message - libsoftokn3.so has the ModuleDBFunc symbol in it,
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > it is
> >> >> > owned by the nss package, so I'm not sure what is going on there.
> >> >> > What
> >> >> > does
> >> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*" return?
> >> >> > -James
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Version 12 apparently:
> >> >>
> >> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libsoft*
> >> >> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn.a     /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so
> >> >> /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.chk  /usr/lib/nss/libsoftokn3.so.12
> >> >> lightning ~ #
> >> >
> >> > Very interesting - so you have the Evolution build using the .11
> version
> >> > of
> >> > libnss3, but you have ther .12 version of libsoftkn3 - what do you see
> >> > from
> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
> >> >
> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
> >>  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
> >> lightning ~ #
> >
> > Aha! And which of the versioned .so's is libnss3.so linking to?
> >
> lightning ~ # ls -l /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      13 2009-01-08 10:00
> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so -> libnss3.so.12
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  560376 2008-11-25 17:02 /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1337104 2009-01-08 10:00 /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
> lightning ~ #
>

Hmm - very odd - seems that the evolution build is specifically grabbing the
libnss3.so.11 version... Maybe try running "ldconfig"? If that doesn't work,
maybe try deleting (or renaming, if you're paranoid ;) ) libnss3.so.11 (and
all other .so.11's that you find in /usr/lib/nss).

Anyone else have any better ideas?

-James

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4795 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:02 PM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:
<NIP>
>> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
>> >> >
>> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
>> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
>> >>  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
>> >> lightning ~ #
>> >
>> > Aha! And which of the versioned .so's is libnss3.so linking to?
>> >
>> lightning ~ # ls -l /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      13 2009-01-08 10:00
>> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so -> libnss3.so.12
>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  560376 2008-11-25 17:02 /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1337104 2009-01-08 10:00 /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
>> lightning ~ #
>
> Hmm - very odd - seems that the evolution build is specifically grabbing the
> libnss3.so.11 version... Maybe try running "ldconfig"? If that doesn't work,
> maybe try deleting (or renaming, if you're paranoid ;) ) libnss3.so.11 (and
> all other .so.11's that you find in /usr/lib/nss).
> Anyone else have any better ideas?
> -James
>

Do I just run ldconfig or are there options/paths I have to give it.
Should I run ldconfig -p and post anything back or is it safe to run.
It looks like /etc/ls.so.conf is a list of libraries.

Would I kill the machine with an emerge -C nss and then emerge it again?

Thanks much,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[James Ausmus]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2028 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:02 PM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> <NIP>
> >> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
> >> >> >
> >> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
> >> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
> >> >>  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
> >> >> lightning ~ #
> >> >
> >> > Aha! And which of the versioned .so's is libnss3.so linking to?
> >> >
> >> lightning ~ # ls -l /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
> >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      13 2009-01-08 10:00
> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so -> libnss3.so.12
> >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  560376 2008-11-25 17:02
> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
> >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1337104 2009-01-08 10:00
> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
> >> lightning ~ #
> >
> > Hmm - very odd - seems that the evolution build is specifically grabbing
> the
> > libnss3.so.11 version... Maybe try running "ldconfig"? If that doesn't
> work,
> > maybe try deleting (or renaming, if you're paranoid ;) ) libnss3.so.11
> (and
> > all other .so.11's that you find in /usr/lib/nss).
> > Anyone else have any better ideas?
> > -James
> >
>
> Do I just run ldconfig or are there options/paths I have to give it.
> Should I run ldconfig -p and post anything back or is it safe to run.
> It looks like /etc/ls.so.conf is a list of libraries.
>

You should just be able to run "ldconfig" by itself with no options - it's
safe to run.



>
> Would I kill the machine with an emerge -C nss and then emerge it again?
>

Hmm - there are a lot of things that wouldn't run while nss was "demerged",
but, I *believe* it would be OK, as long as you ensure you have all the nss
source packages downloaded prior to the emerge -C nss - easy way to make
sure is to emerge -f nss first, then you're guaranteed that it's fully
downloaded (unless the nss build system itself does any downloading, but I
believe nss doesn't have any wonkiness in it's build system - just standard
autotools).

-James



>
> Thanks much,
> Mark
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3071 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:21 PM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:02 PM, James Ausmus <james.ausmus@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> <NIP>
>> >> >> > a "ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*"?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> lightning ~ # ls /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
>> >> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
>> >> >>  /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
>> >> >> lightning ~ #
>> >> >
>> >> > Aha! And which of the versioned .so's is libnss3.so linking to?
>> >> >
>> >> lightning ~ # ls -l /usr/lib/nss/libnss3*
>> >> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      13 2009-01-08 10:00
>> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so -> libnss3.so.12
>> >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  560376 2008-11-25 17:02
>> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.11
>> >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1337104 2009-01-08 10:00
>> >> /usr/lib/nss/libnss3.so.12
>> >> lightning ~ #
>> >
>> > Hmm - very odd - seems that the evolution build is specifically grabbing
>> > the
>> > libnss3.so.11 version... Maybe try running "ldconfig"? If that doesn't
>> > work,
>> > maybe try deleting (or renaming, if you're paranoid ;) ) libnss3.so.11
>> > (and
>> > all other .so.11's that you find in /usr/lib/nss).
>> > Anyone else have any better ideas?
>> > -James
>> >
>>
>> Do I just run ldconfig or are there options/paths I have to give it.
>> Should I run ldconfig -p and post anything back or is it safe to run.
>> It looks like /etc/ls.so.conf is a list of libraries.
>
> You should just be able to run "ldconfig" by itself with no options - it's
> safe to run.
>
>>
>> Would I kill the machine with an emerge -C nss and then emerge it again?
>
> Hmm - there are a lot of things that wouldn't run while nss was "demerged",
> but, I *believe* it would be OK, as long as you ensure you have all the nss
> source packages downloaded prior to the emerge -C nss - easy way to make
> sure is to emerge -f nss first, then you're guaranteed that it's fully
> downloaded (unless the nss build system itself does any downloading, but I
> believe nss doesn't have any wonkiness in it's build system - just standard
> autotools).
> -James
>
>>
>> Thanks much,
>> Mark
>>
>
>
Same results emerging evolution after running ldconfig.

Other than curl which I don't know much about it seems that remving
nss wouldn't be that likely to cause horrific problems:

lightning ~ # equery depends nss
[ Searching for packages depending on nss... ]
gnome-extra/evolution-data-server-2.22.3-r1 (ssl? >=dev-libs/nss-3.9)
mail-client/evolution-2.22.3.1 (ssl? >=dev-libs/nss-3.11)
net-libs/xulrunner-1.8.1.19 (>=dev-libs/nss-3.11.5)
net-libs/xulrunner-1.9.0.5 (>=dev-libs/nss-3.12)
net-misc/curl-7.18.2 (nss & !gnutls? dev-libs/nss)
net-www/netscape-flash-10.0.15.3 (x86? dev-libs/nss)
www-client/mozilla-firefox-3.0.5 (>=dev-libs/nss-3.12)
lightning ~ #

Even with respect to curl I'm guessing it doesn't matter as I have the
flag turned off and it's the only package with that flag:

lightning ~ # equery hasuse nss
[ Searching for USE flag nss in all categories among: ]
 * installed packages
[I--] [  ] net-misc/curl-7.18.2 (0)
lightning ~ #


lightning ~ # emerge -pv curl

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

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R   ] net-misc/curl-7.18.2  USE="ipv6 ldap ssl -ares -gnutls
-idn -kerberos -libssh2 -nss -test" 0 kB

Total: 1 package (1 reinstall), Size of downloads: 0 kB
lightning ~ #

I actually did an emerge -ef world already just to ensure everything
is here. I'm considering the emerge -C nss, remove any links left over
by hand, and then emerging evolution again and letting it pull it in
and build it in one step.

Comments?

Thanks,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
> I actually did an emerge -ef world already just to ensure everything
> is here. I'm considering the emerge -C nss, remove any links left over
> by hand, and then emerging evolution again and letting it pull it in
> and build it in one step.
>
> Comments?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>

OK, this worked for me. I removed nss and the nss directory and all
links were gone. I then emerged evolution which pulled in nss and
everything was built correctly.

There's a bug in there somewhere I suppose but I won't be reporting it.

Thanks to all for your help and explanation about what the purpose of
the new commands are. I appreciate it.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 359 bytes --]

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:20:00 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
> that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?

revdep-rebuild fixes broken packages, @preserved-libs prevents the
breakage in the first place.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Use the Force, Luke, Don't give in to the DOS side.- ObiWan Kenobi

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Donnerstag 08 Januar 2009, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:20:00 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> > Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
> > that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?
>
> revdep-rebuild fixes broken packages, @preserved-libs prevents the
> breakage in the first place.

it also prevents revdep-rebuilt from working correctly.

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:20:00 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
>> that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?
>
> revdep-rebuild fixes broken packages, @preserved-libs prevents the
> breakage in the first place.
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick

OK, so the programs aren't broken but in my case the libs aren't
rebuilding since the emerge step fails.

What to do? Just sit and wait until someone updates something in
portage and eventually it gets cleaned up well enough to build?

If that is the basic answer then when do the old libs get removed?
When the @preserved-rebuild finally passes?

Thanks,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 675 bytes --]

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:53:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:

> OK, so the programs aren't broken but in my case the libs aren't
> rebuilding since the emerge step fails.

It's the programs that need to be rebuilt, against the newer libraries.

> What to do? Just sit and wait until someone updates something in
> portage and eventually it gets cleaned up well enough to build?

Or file a bug on b.g.o.

> If that is the basic answer then when do the old libs get removed?
> When the @preserved-rebuild finally passes?

That's how I understand it works.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

You cannot really appreciate Dilbert unless you've read it in the
original Klingon.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Mark Knecht]

On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:53:18 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>> OK, so the programs aren't broken but in my case the libs aren't
>> rebuilding since the emerge step fails.
>
> It's the programs that need to be rebuilt, against the newer libraries.
>

OK, thanks. That makes sense as @preserved-rebuild wanted to emerge evolution.

>> What to do? Just sit and wait until someone updates something in
>> portage and eventually it gets cleaned up well enough to build?
>
> Or file a bug on b.g.o.

Seems I'm generally better off to wait a few days before I do that,
but it is an option.

>
>> If that is the basic answer then when do the old libs get removed?
>> When the @preserved-rebuild finally passes?
>
> That's how I understand it works.

Makes sense.

Thanks,
Mark
>
>
> --
> Neil Bothwick
>
> You cannot really appreciate Dilbert unless you've read it in the
> original Klingon.
>

Re: [gentoo-user] Please explain why this new 'emerge @preserved-rebuild' is good?

[Momesso Andrea]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 629 bytes --]

On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 05:47:15PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:20:00 -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
> 
> > Is this adding some value that I don't understand? What does it do
> > that using revdep-rebuild doesn't?
> 
> revdep-rebuild fixes broken packages, @preserved-libs prevents the
> breakage in the first place.
> 

Yes and no...

This is an interesting reading:
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2008/06/30/a-few-risks-i-see-related-to-the-new-portage-2-2-preserve-libs-behaviour



TopperH

===========================
Momesso Andrea
http://topperh.blogspot.com
===========================

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]