1 |
El mié, 06-06-2012 a las 02:51 +0200, Michael Weber escribió: |
2 |
[...] |
3 |
> |
4 |
> [1] if you forget the -X on module-rebuild, you might no longer have |
5 |
> the virtualbox-modules version installed in the tree (no packages |
6 |
> satisfy ...). virtualbox does remove old versions real quick. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> The fun part comes with non-root users trying to log in: |
9 |
|
10 |
Yeah, I also had a similar problem with nvidia-drivers, maybe |
11 |
module-rebuild should default to "-X" behavior, or is there any reason |
12 |
why forcing the current behavior is better? Do we really should support |
13 |
by default setups that don't apply all updates (neither locally mask |
14 |
unwanted newer versions) after syncing their tree? |
15 |
|
16 |
> |
17 |
> [2] You've updated nvidia-drivers (kernel module providers in general) |
18 |
> userland and kernel modules, but forget to `rmmod nvidia`, or you |
19 |
> can't without terminating user sessions, it impossible to start new X |
20 |
> servers due to version mismatch between userland and kernel (applies |
21 |
> for virtualbox as well) |
22 |
> |
23 |
|
24 |
Maybe if we were able to call "rmmod -w nvidia" from nvidia-drivers |
25 |
ebuild... that way, once you log out from X, old module would be |
26 |
outloaded and new one loaded by X when restarting. The problem is that |
27 |
there is no way to run this command after emerge "automatically" |
28 |
|
29 |
> [3] You've updated zlib, but failed to recognize it in the emerge -av |
30 |
> output. You get angry reports about broken luatex and inkscape |
31 |
> (imagemagik) because of some nasty zlib abi version mismatch, hidden |
32 |
> from revdep-rebuild. |
33 |
> |
34 |
> [5] lafilefixer (funny) |
35 |
|
36 |
I am not sure if this is still needed these days :-/, at least portage |
37 |
looks to fix them, but I think this is not supported on other PMs (or |
38 |
maybe they handle this other way apart from lafilefixer also) |
39 |
|
40 |
> [4] python-updater (rare) |
41 |
> [6] ocaml gets broken after update w/o lablgl rebuild |
42 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/385869 |
43 |
> |
44 |
> Well, I'm lazy, and do this in the backgound, half asleep. |
45 |
> And I admit that [1] and [2] are my faults, but [3] is very annoying |
46 |
> (just like libdl related stuff) and esp. kernel+module updates take a |
47 |
> lot more than just a few 'REBUILD' packages. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> Is there any chance to detect this ZLIB_VERSION problem with |
50 |
> revdep-rebuild (worst case: add a list of possibly broken packages |
51 |
> with tests)? |
52 |
> |
53 |
> ===== |
54 |
> |
55 |
> I understand the urge for `eupdate` but that needs an agreement on |
56 |
> the implementation, and I see some rought edges here, where unattended |
57 |
> script magic most likely fails. |
58 |
> |
59 |
> Michael -- half asleep |
60 |
> |
61 |
> - -- |
62 |
> Gentoo Dev |
63 |
> http://xmw.de/ |