1 |
On 01/11/2013 17:43, gottlieb@×××.edu wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, Nov 01 2013, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> On 01/11/2013 15:41, gottlieb@×××.edu wrote: |
5 |
>>> On Thu, Oct 31 2013, gottlieb@×××.edu wrote: |
6 |
>>> |
7 |
>>>> On Sun, Oct 27 2013, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
8 |
>>>> |
9 |
>>>>> Making things "just work" is complex when trying to juggle 6 or more |
10 |
>>>>> supported versions/implementations of python. |
11 |
>>>> |
12 |
>>>> Indeed. |
13 |
>>>> |
14 |
>>>>> We have tried to explain the magic make.conf lines in the Python user guide. |
15 |
>>>>> |
16 |
>>>>> https://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/Python/python-r1/user-guide.xml |
17 |
>>>>> |
18 |
>>>>> We also try to make sure that most users never have to touch |
19 |
>>>>> PYTHON_TARGETS, etc; the default values provided by your profile are |
20 |
>>>>> set up to allow *stable* python2.7 and python3.2 to work properly. |
21 |
>>>> |
22 |
>>>>> ~arch users are expected to read the docs. ^_^ |
23 |
>>>> |
24 |
>>>> I am a ~amd64 user and I just read the user-guide. :-) |
25 |
>>>> I do not see any action items for my system; but do see a large number |
26 |
>>>> of reinstalls proposed by emerge |
27 |
>>>> |
28 |
>>>> I do not change any python variables in make.conf so emerge --info shows |
29 |
>>>> PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET="python2_7" |
30 |
>>>> PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7 python3_2" |
31 |
>>>> |
32 |
>>>> a recursive grep -i for python in /etc/portage yields only |
33 |
>>>> ./package.use/imaging-pillow:5:virtual/python-imaging |
34 |
>>>> -python_targets_python3_2 |
35 |
>>>> |
36 |
>>>> So I basically have the default except for the imaging/pillow business. |
37 |
>>>> |
38 |
>>>> I note that update world wants to rebuild a bunch of packages (the |
39 |
>>>> entire output is below). Some are qt-related others involve |
40 |
>>>> PYTHON_TARGETS. |
41 |
>>>> |
42 |
>>>> Does this mean that I can let the 44 packages / 38 reinstalls update occur |
43 |
>>>> and expect a running system to result? It is unusual, but I realize not |
44 |
>>>> unprecedented, to have so many reinstalls and I would like to confirm |
45 |
>>>> that this is expected. |
46 |
>>>> |
47 |
>>>> thanks, |
48 |
>>>> allan |
49 |
>>> |
50 |
>>> I realize that I forgot to attach the list of packages emerge wants to |
51 |
>>> reinstall. So I did the same emerge command (I always use --ask) and |
52 |
>>> they are *gone*. This I don't understand since I didn't sync inbetween |
53 |
>>> (ls -lt /usr/portage shows nothing since wednesday). |
54 |
>>> |
55 |
>>> I though all dependencies, etc are resolved locally so why would it |
56 |
>>> change from 44 packages with 38 reinstalls to 4 packages with no |
57 |
>>> reinstalls? |
58 |
>> |
59 |
>> |
60 |
>> Did you make any changes to make.conf between your previous mail and |
61 |
>> doing this last test? |
62 |
> |
63 |
> Good question, but no. |
64 |
> |
65 |
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 709 Sep 18 14:58 /etc/portage/make.conf |
66 |
> |
67 |
> allan |
68 |
> |
69 |
|
70 |
I think we can agree that something must have changed on your system in |
71 |
the last few days, we just have to find it. |
72 |
|
73 |
Otherwise we'd have to concede that portage has code like this: |
74 |
|
75 |
if rnd(0,2) |
76 |
do_stupid_emerge() |
77 |
else |
78 |
do_sensible_emerge() |
79 |
endif |
80 |
|
81 |
I reckon it's safe to assume portage does not contain code like that :-) |
82 |
|
83 |
Did you run any portage commands at all that cause changes since |
84 |
Wednesday? "emerge @preserved-rebuild" and depclean are good candidates, |
85 |
I often forget about those myself. |
86 |
|
87 |
How about any file at all in /etc/portage that changes since wednesday? |
88 |
Or /var/lib/portage/world*? |
89 |
|
90 |
-- |
91 |
Alan McKinnon |
92 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |