Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: Lance Lassetter <lancelassetter@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Python-updater line 415 error
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:04:26
Message-Id: 1249286661.11683.1.camel@localhost
In Reply to: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Python-updater line 415 error by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 07:12 +0000, Duncan wrote:
2 > Frank Peters <frank.peters@×××××××.net> posted
3 > 20090803022804.b9e5a8a0.frank.peters@×××××××.net, excerpted below, on
4 > Mon, 03 Aug 2009 02:28:04 -0400:
5 >
6 > > On Mon, 03 Aug 2009 01:21:40 -0500
7 > > Lance Lassetter <lancelassetter@×××××.com> wrote:
8 > >
9 > >
10 > >
11 > >> # bash --version
12 > >> GNU bash, version 3.2.39(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Copyright (C)
13 > >> 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
14 > >>
15 > >>
16 > >>
17 > > Thanks again. I thought so. My bash version is 4.0.28(2) and there
18 > > obviously have been some changes. Version 3.2 goes back a long way.
19 > > Another program where I have experienced problems is eselect, which is
20 > > another bash script. Again there was a syntax fault.
21 > >
22 > > I will have to look into this a little better in the morning and maybe
23 > > file a bug report.
24 >
25 > FWIW, here (and see below for the Gentoo versions):
26 >
27 > GNU bash, version 4.0.28(2)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
28 >
29 > That's current ~amd64 as of yesterday's sync.
30 >
31 > I haven't run python-updater in some time but it ran fine when I ran it
32 > last. I do need to run it again since python-3.1 was just in yesterday's
33 > updates, tho, and see what happens.
34 >
35 > Meanwhile, I've had exactly zero problems with eselect, but I don't use
36 > that many modules of it as I manage a lot of what it does, like the
37 > kernel symlink, the make.profile symlink, etc, manually.
38 >
39 > Here's my bash, python and python-updater versions:
40 >
41 > $equery l bash python
42 > * Searching for bash ...
43 > [IP-] [ ~] app-shells/bash-4.0_p28 (0)
44 >
45 > * Searching for python ...
46 > [IP-] [ ~] dev-lang/python-2.6.2-r1 (2.6)
47 > [IP-] [ ~] dev-lang/python-3.1 (3.1)
48 >
49 > * Searching for python-updater ...
50 > [IP-] [ ~] app-admin/python-updater-0.7 (0)
51 > $
52 >
53 > Are you full ~amd64, or did you package.keyword bash? If you're running
54 > a mixed ~arch/stable system, it's possible that's the problem, tho it
55 > doesn't look like it should be python-updater itself, since 0.7 is the
56 > highest available for both stable and ~arch.
57 >
58 > Here's a depth-2 depends graph for the 4.0 p28 bash version:
59 >
60 > $equery g --depth=2 bash-4.0_p28
61 > * Searching for bash ...
62 > * dependency graph for app-shells/bash-4.0_p28:
63 > `-- app-shells/bash-4.0_p28
64 > `-- sys-libs/ncurses-5.7-r1
65 > `-- sys-libs/gpm-1.20.6 [gpm]
66 > `-- sec-policy/selinux-gpm (unable to resolve: package masked or
67 > removed)
68 > `-- virtual/libintl-0 (virtual/libintl) [nls]
69 > `-- sys-devel/gettext-0.17 [elibc_FreeBSD]
70 > [ app-shells/bash-4.0_p28 stats: packages (5), max depth (2) ]
71 > $
72 >
73 > python-updater itself doesn't seem to have any significant dependencies,
74 > just a package manager (portage, pkgcore or paludis), at the first level.
75 >
76
77 it's mixed. only select few packages installed ~x86 and their required
78 deps. i would, personally, never go full blown ~x86 due to core
79 packages needing to be stable.