| 1 |
On 2021-10-13, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 9:22 PM Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On 2021-10-13, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > |
| 6 |
>> > Profile selection is implemented as a symlink from |
| 7 |
>> > /etc/portage/make.profile. If you move your repository, then you need |
| 8 |
>> > to re-select the profile since the symlink will be broken. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Indeed. And the failure that produces is not at all graceful. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> I spent a little time trying to figure out where in the Wiki or docs |
| 13 |
>> that the rsync -> git migration steps should be documented, but I |
| 14 |
>> didn't find anyplace that looked like the right home for that info. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Moving from rsync to git probably doesn't require re-selecting the |
| 18 |
> profile. However, if you move the path of the repository itself then |
| 19 |
> that would require re-selecting the profile regardless of whether the |
| 20 |
> method of syncing is changed. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I got the impression from your email that you moved the repository |
| 23 |
> when you switched. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Yes. I was in the old location /usr/portage, and I moved it to the new |
| 26 |
/var/db location. That's what broke the profile selection. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> If you ONLY renamed the old one but kept the same exact path, then |
| 29 |
> after it pulled the new repo the profile should have remained |
| 30 |
> working as far as I am aware. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I think that's correct. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> If I'm understanding the situation, then the correct place to put |
| 35 |
> this in the wiki is in any section pertaining to moving the |
| 36 |
> repository (such as to /var/db or whatever). It wouldn't hurt to |
| 37 |
> make a note in any instructions for switching to git to be aware of |
| 38 |
> the requirement if the opportunity is taken to move the repository |
| 39 |
> at the same time. It is a pretty logical time to do this. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
That's certainly what I thought. :) |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
> The error messages may very well have been misleading though. |
| 44 |
> Portage is a bit infamous for misleading error messages. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
There wasn't an error message at all. Just a Python stack trace becaus |
| 47 |
of an exception thrown because None doesn't have a startswith method. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
-- |
| 50 |
Grant |
Archives