Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Jack <ostroffjh@×××××××××××××××××.net>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead?
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 15:26:29
Message-Id: c984a97b-fb88-dc1f-8255-50ace97a8e5f@users.sourceforge.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead? by John Covici
1 On 4/22/20 11:20 AM, John Covici wrote:
2 > On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:04:24 -0400,
3 > Dale wrote:
4 >> [1 <text/plain; UTF-8 (8bit)>]
5 >> John Covici wrote:
6 >>> On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 08:53:24 -0400,
7 >>> Dale wrote:
8 >>>
9 >>>> I did a search on the forums for teamview but didn't find that problem.
10 >>>> Did you perhaps install it without using portage at some point?  If not,
11 >>>> can you try to emerge it and post the failure here, a new thread might
12 >>>> be best.  I bet there is someone here who can fix it even if they don't
13 >>>> use that package.  Generally, a file collision for one package is
14 >>>> handled much like any other package.  It's been a long time and emerge
15 >>>> has changed a LOT but the last time I ran into this, I unmerged the
16 >>>> package and then re-emerged it.
17 >>>>
18 >>>> Sendmail.  I found this:
19 >>>>
20 >>>>
21 >>>> root@fireball / # cat
22 >>>> /var/cache/portage/tree/mail-mta/sendmail/metadata.xml
23 >>>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
24 >>>> <!DOCTYPE pkgmetadata SYSTEM "http://www.gentoo.org/dtd/metadata.dtd">
25 >>>> <pkgmetadata>
26 >>>>         <!-- maintainer-needed -->
27 >>>> </pkgmetadata>
28 >>>> root@fireball / #
29 >>>>
30 >>>>
31 >>>> It seems to be maintainer needed at the moment.  Most likely a dev
32 >>>> retired or was otherwise unable to maintain it any longer.  I'm not sure
33 >>>> who to contact to see if it can be nudged into action tho. You may can
34 >>>> talk to a dev, Rich is active on here, and see if he knows or is willing
35 >>>> to post on -dev about it needing attention.  Given its widespread use,
36 >>>> surely someone who uses it can step up and maintain it.
37 >>>>
38 >>>> Ant-core is maintained by the java team.  I'm not sure what their status
39 >>>> is at the moment but since it still exists, I'm sure they are active.
40 >>>> I've seen posts in the past that the java team is a bit slow, lots of
41 >>>> work and not enough time in the day.  Might just take a little time.
42 >>>>
43 >>> Here is the relevant section from teamviewer build:
44 >>> * checking 102 files for package collisions
45 >>> * This package will overwrite one or more files that may belong to
46 >>> other
47 >>> * packages (see list below). You can use a command such as
48 >>> `portageq
49 >>> * owners / <filename>` to identify the installed package that owns
50 >>> a
51 >>> * file. If portageq reports that only one package owns a file
52 >>> then do
53 >>> * NOT file a bug report. A bug report is only useful if it
54 >>> identifies at
55 >>> * least two or more packages that are known to install the same
56 >>> file(s).
57 >>> * If a collision occurs and you can not explain where the file
58 >>> came from
59 >>> * then you should simply ignore the collision since there is
60 >>> not enough
61 >>> * information to determine if a real problem exists. Please
62 >>> do NOT file
63 >>> * a bug report at https://bugs.gentoo.org/ unless you
64 >>> report exactly
65 >>> * which two packages install the same file(s). See
66 >>> * https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Knowledge_Base:Blockers
67 >>> for tips on how
68 >>> * to solve the problem. And once again, please do NOT
69 >>> file a bug report
70 >>> * unless you have completely understood the above
71 >>> message.
72 >>> *
73 >>> * Detected file collision(s):
74 >>> *
75 >>> * /usr/share/dbus-1/services/com.teamviewer.TeamViewer.service
76 >>> * /usr/share/dbus-1/services/com.teamviewer.TeamViewer.Desktop.service
77 >>> * /usr/share/polkit-1/actions/com.teamviewer.TeamViewer.policy
78 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps/TeamViewer.png
79 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/TeamViewer.png
80 >>> *
81 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/TeamViewer.png
82 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps/TeamViewer.png
83 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256/apps/TeamViewer.png
84 >>> * /lib/systemd/system/teamviewerd.service
85 >>> * /opt/bin/teamviewer
86 >>> * /opt/bin/teamviewerd
87 >>> *
88 >>> * Searching all installed packages for file
89 >>> collisions...
90 >>> *
91 >>> * Press Ctrl-C to Stop
92 >>> *
93 >>> * net-misc/teamviewer-14.7.1965:14::gentoo
94 >>> * /lib/systemd/system/teamviewerd.service
95 >>> * /opt/bin/teamviewer
96 >>> * /opt/bin/teamviewerd
97 >>> * /usr/share/dbus-1/services/com.teamviewer.TeamViewer.Desktop.service
98 >>> *
99 >>> * /usr/share/dbus-1/services/com.teamviewer.TeamViewer.service
100 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps/TeamViewer.png
101 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps/TeamViewer.png
102 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256/apps/TeamViewer.png
103 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/TeamViewer.png
104 >>> *
105 >>> * /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/TeamViewer.png
106 >>> * /usr/share/polkit-1/actions/com.teamviewer.TeamViewer.policy
107 >>> *
108 >>> * Package
109 >>> 'net-misc/teamviewer-15.4.4445'
110 >>> NOT merged due to file
111 >>> * collisions. If necessary,
112 >>> refer to your elog messages
113 >>> for the whole
114 >>> * content of the above
115 >>> message.
116 >>>
117 >>> How do ebuilds normally handle such a thing -- don't all new versions
118 >>> have this situation?
119 >>>
120 >> It does but it seems portage thinks the files belong to another
121 >> package.  I'm not sure why that is tho.  You may can use the portageq
122 >> command it mentions to see what that is.  I suspect it will be a
123 >> interesting result.  I think I've only ran into this once.  There is a
124 >> way to override it but I can't recall how it's done.
125 >>
126 >> If it were me, I'd manually remove the files and emerge the package IF
127 >> they do not belong to another package.  Once they are gone, it won't be
128 >> a problem.  Maybe this is just a quirk or something that is a one time
129 >> deal.
130 >>
131 >> I think this is how to disable this but I'd be sure it is safe before
132 >> doing this.
133 >>
134 >> FEATURES="-collision-protect" emerge -a teamviewer
135 >>
136 >> Make sure the spelling is correct there.  Again, make sure those don't
137 >> belong to another package that will be broken.  In theory, this
138 >> shouldn't happen to begin with.
139 >>
140 >> Hope that gives you some options.
141 > The reason I did not try any of those is because the package which
142 > owns the files is a previous version of the same package!! This
143 > disturbs me that portage does not igure this out all by itself.
144
145 How did you determine that?  Does portage agree with that statement?  Is
146 it the same category and package?  Was the previous version installed by
147 portage?
148
149 One possible approach would be to quickpg the installed version, then
150 unmerge it and try the new emerge again.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Is Gentoo dead? John Covici <covici@××××××××××.com>