| 1 |
Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> I've been noticing this for a couple revisions I think, but am not sure if |
| 3 |
> it's new behavior or if I'm just noticing what's been there all along. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> At the end of a new package merge, after the binpkg tarball (I'm using |
| 6 |
> FEATURES=binpkg) has been created, then decompressed and merged, but |
| 7 |
> before the emerge --clean phase unmerges old versions, I'm seeing what |
| 8 |
> appears to be an incorrect but harmless message. Here's what I get for |
| 9 |
> gcc, so you can see the sequence (the three lines, safely unmerging thru |
| 10 |
> original instance unmerged, is what I'm talking about): |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>>>>/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.1.1/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc-4.1.1 -> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc |
| 14 |
>>>>Safely unmerging already-installed instance... |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> No package files given... Grabbing a set. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
>>>>Original instance of package unmerged safely. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> * The current gcc config appears valid, so it will not be |
| 21 |
> * automatically switched for you. If you would like to |
| 22 |
> * switch to the newly installed gcc version, do the |
| 23 |
> * following: |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> * eselect compiler set <profile> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> * If you have issues with packages unable to locate libstdc++.la, |
| 29 |
> * then try running 'fix_libtool_files.sh' on the old gcc versions. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
>>>>Regenerating /etc/ld.so.cache... |
| 33 |
>>>>sys-devel/gcc-4.1.1 merged. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
>>>>No packages selected for removal by clean. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
>>>>Auto-cleaning packages... |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> /What/ already-installed instance? It's a /new/ version of the package, |
| 43 |
> so there was no already installed instance to unmerge. Again, this is |
| 44 |
> before the clean phase, which occurs just after that, and which removes |
| 45 |
> the old version as expected, so it's not that. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> I know the message itself isn't new, and I'm used to seeing it when I'm |
| 48 |
> remerging a package over itself, where the message makes sense. Why is it |
| 49 |
> showing up here, when it's a new package version, so there's no original |
| 50 |
> instance to unmerge? Is this new behavior or has it always done that and I |
| 51 |
> never noticed it until now? |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Looking at the code I'd guess you'd never noticed, I don't see any |
| 55 |
commits in treewalk lately, it should occur for all packages. |
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives