Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading 1-year old system

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 29/01/2017 22:56, thelma@×××××××××××.com wrote:
>> I haven't updated my system for over a year (1year and 3-months).
>> I was trying to upgrade my firefox-bin and I'm already running into problems.
>>
>> What is my best option, re-install from scratch, upgrade in stages etc.
>> With firefox-bin I'm getting:
>
>
> 1 year 3 months isn't usually that bad and it can be done - I've done it
> many times myself. However there are gotchas:
>
> - there is no stock method and no stock answers. So asking
> "I can't upgrade procps! What must I do?"
> isn't going to get you much in the way of usable replies. Most will be
> something like "I have no idea. Please be /way/ more specific"
>
> - you need to understand what portage is telling you when it dumps a
> crapload of output on the screen. If you can read through blockers and
> figure out what to do, it's usually not that hard. It however tedious.
>
> - you need to have a good grasp of what most packages do. So if you
> think perhaps you need to unmerge binutils or python, your brain must
> scream at you that it's a very very bad idea, and you need to know why
> (reason: portage don't work for shit with those packages gone and  needs
> them present to put them back. Hello chicken, greet egg)
>
> - go slowly and deal with one block at a time. A regular emerge world
> probably won't succeed so you gotta bite of small chunks
>
> With those basics out the way, it's a great learning experience. I
> recommend you do it at least once.
>
>> emerge -p firefox-bin
>>
>> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>>
>> Calculating dependencies... done!
>> [ebuild  N     ] dev-libs/libuv-1.10.2  USE="-static-libs"
>> [ebuild  N     ] dev-util/ninja-1.6.0  USE="-doc -emacs {-test} -vim-syntax -zsh-completion"
>> [ebuild     U  ] www-client/firefox-bin-45.6.0 [38.6.1] L10N="-ach% -af% -an% -ar% -as% -ast% -az% -be% -bg% -bn-BD% -bn-IN% -br% -bs% -ca% -cs% -cy% -da% -de% -el% -en-GB% -en-ZA% -eo% -es-AR% -es-CL% -es-ES% -es-MX% -et% -eu% -fa% -fi% -fr% -fy% -ga% -gd% -gl% -gu% -he% -hi% -hr% -hsb% -hu% -hy% -id% -is% -it% -ja% -kk% -km% -kn% -ko% -lt% -lv% -mai% -mk% -ml% -mr% -ms% -nb% -nl% -nn% -or% -pa% -pl% -pt-BR% -pt-PT% -rm% -ro% -ru% -si% -sk% -sl% -son% -sq% -sr% -sv% -ta% -te% -th% -tr% -uk% -uz% -vi% -xh% -zh-CN% -zh-TW%"
>> [ebuild     U  ] dev-java/java-config-2.2.0-r3 [2.2.0] USE="{-test%}" PYTHON_TARGETS="(-python3_5)"
>> [uninstall     ] dev-java/java-config-wrapper-0.16
>> [blocks b      ] dev-java/java-config-wrapper ("dev-java/java-config-wrapper" is blocking dev-java/java-config-2.2.0-r3)
>> [ebuild  NS    ] sys-libs/db-5.3.28-r2 [4.8.30-r2] USE="cxx java -doc -examples -tcl {-test}"
>> [ebuild     U  ] sys-libs/ncurses-6.0-r1 [5.9-r5] USE="{-test%} -threads%"
>> [ebuild  r  U  ] sys-process/procps-3.3.12 [3.3.10-r1] USE="kill%*"
>> [ebuild     U  ] dev-util/cmake-3.7.2 [3.3.1-r1]
>> [ebuild  r  U  ] sys-devel/llvm-3.7.1-r3 [3.5.0] USE="-lldb%"
>> [ebuild  rR    ] app-editors/xemacs-21.4.24
>
> java-config-wrapper is long gone. Remove it and java-config will
> probably succeed
>
>> !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
>> !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
>>
>> sys-process/procps:0
>>
>>   (sys-process/procps-3.3.12:0/5::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
>>     (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
>>
>>   (sys-process/procps-3.3.10-r1:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>     sys-process/procps:0/0= required by (dev-db/mariadb-10.0.22:0/18::gentoo, installed)
>>                       ^^^^^
> Update mariadb by itself to fix this. The version you have wants a
> subslot of procps that no longer exists
>
>> sys-libs/ncurses:0
>>
>>   (sys-libs/ncurses-6.0-r1:0/6::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
>>     (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
>>
>>   (sys-libs/ncurses-5.9-r5:0/5::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>     sys-libs/ncurses:0/5= required by (dev-lang/ruby-2.0.0_p647-r1:2.0/2.0::gentoo, installed)
>>                     ^^^^^
>>     sys-libs/ncurses:0/5[ada?,cxx?,gpm?,static-libs?,tinfo?,unicode?,abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_ppc_32(-)?,abi_ppc_64(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?] required by (sys-libs/ncurses-5.9-r99:5/5::gentoo, installed)
>>                     ^^^^
>>     (and 15 more with the same problems)
> see below about ruby-2.0
>
>> sys-devel/llvm:0
>>
>>   (sys-devel/llvm-3.7.1-r3:0/3.7.1::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
>>     (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
>>
>>   (sys-devel/llvm-3.5.0:0/3.5::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>>     >=sys-devel/llvm-3.4.2:0/3.5=[abi_x86_32(-)] required by (media-libs/mesa-11.0.6:0/0::gentoo, installed)
>>                           ^^^^^^^
> Don't worry about this one. It's a slot conflict - portage can't upgrade
> llvm to the latest version because your existing mesa blocks it, so
> portage "helpfully" dumps a crapload to ominous messages on the screen
> to tell you this, and scare you out of your wits as well.
>
> This will likely fix itself when mesa is upgraded
>
>> NOTE: Use the '--verbose-conflicts' option to display parents omitted above
>>
>> It may be possible to solve this problem by using package.mask to
>> prevent one of those packages from being selected. However, it is also
>> possible that conflicting dependencies exist such that they are
>> impossible to satisfy simultaneously.  If such a conflict exists in
>> the dependencies of two different packages, then those packages can
>> not be installed simultaneously. You may want to try a larger value of
>> the --backtrack option, such as --backtrack=30, in order to see if
>> that will solve this conflict automatically.
>>
>> For more information, see MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge man
>> page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
>>
>>
>> !!! The following installed packages are masked:
>> - dev-lang/ruby-2.0.0_p647-r1::gentoo (masked by: package.mask)
>> /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask:
>> # Hans de Graaff <graaff@g.o> (07 Dec 2016)
>> # Mask ruby 2.0 for removal, bug 576034
> Here's your real problem. ruby-2.0 is since ages past masked, and it
> will block loads of stuff. Portage won't remove it (2.0 is SLOTted) but
> a depclean might; howevr, world needs to be fully up to date before
> depclean is prepared to take action.
>
> There was a news item about this, so read it. eselect news list.
>
> You need to pick a new default ruby - probably 2.1 - and let portage
> deal with the result
>
>> - app-forensics/chkrootkit-0.49::gentoo (masked by: package.mask)
>> /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask:
>> # Aaron Bauman <bman@g.o> (19 Mar 2016)
>> # Unpatched security vulnerability per bug #512356.
>>
>> For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge
>> man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
>>
>>
> Ignore this one initially. chkrootkit-0.49 is hardmasked. It will be
> updated in due course.
>
>
> When you've dealt with java-config-wrapper, mariadb and ruby, try emerge
> world again. You will be presented with a whole new bunch of interesting
> and fascinating problems to solve, all of which are unique and needs
> their own approach. The approach depends of course on the nature of the
> problem and you have to run emerge world to see what that is. Rinse,
> repeat and keep doing it till portage is happy, your tree is synced and
> no problems remain.
>
> [You will probably need to deal with perl-cleaner, python-updater and
> the ruby equivalent towards th end, this gets all your modules sync'ed
> back up with your version of the interpreter.]
>
> "Gentoo is not for the faint-hearted" is the quote I think most applies
> here.
>

Might I also add, the -t option can reveal what is causing what
sometimes.  Also, I'd start with @system first, then work on @world. 
Only bad thing is, KDE, if you have it installed, is in @system because
of dependencies, last I checked anyway.  That will make @system a lot of
fun itself. 

It's going to be fun tho. 

Dale

:-)  :-)