Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gcc compiling, is this normal?
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 08:56:58
Message-Id: 5190AACE.2090205@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Gcc compiling, is this normal? by Alan McKinnon
1 Alan McKinnon wrote:
2 > I'm not sure what to make of this. portage lists the packages
3 > correctly and has the SLOTs correct, but emerge seems to be launched
4 > incorrectly. It's all very odd, and looks like bug-report material. To
5 > be useful you are going to need data. Could you quickpkg the current
6 > and previous versions of both SLOTs? That will make it easy to upgrade
7 > and downgrade packages, then run emerge world over and over to see
8 > what it does without it taking 40 minutes each time.
9
10 Well, here is this:
11
12 [-P-] [ ] sys-apps/portage-2.1.11.63:0
13 [-P-] [ ] sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha173:0
14 [IP-] [ ] sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha174:0
15
16 This is the portage update info. I use genlop -t to do this. I know
17 there is a better way but can't remember the command. lol I think it
18 was one of the q thingys.
19
20 Fri Apr 5 12:49:29 2013 >>> sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha171
21 merge time: 27 seconds.
22
23 Sat Apr 6 11:00:10 2013 >>> sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha171
24 merge time: 26 seconds.
25
26 Mon Apr 15 08:33:49 2013 >>> sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha173
27 merge time: 31 seconds.
28
29 Mon May 6 22:36:15 2013 >>> sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha174
30 merge time: 30 seconds.
31
32
33 Based on that, I would say it started about the time *173 hit. I can't
34 go back to the *171 since it is no longer in the tree.
35
36 I'm not sure I know enough about debugging to help much but it sure is
37 weird. Should have known something weird like this would hit me. :/
38
39 I'm sort of pretty active on this thing right now since I do some
40 volunteer mod work on a site. I'd rather not get myself to a spot where
41 my rig aini't working. I'm not even doing upgrades like I used to.
42 Well, not as often anyway. I just have to plan stuff to make sure I'm
43 up and running.
44
45 I checked for roach reports and didn't see this reported anywhere. I
46 wonder if a USE flag is triggering this? This is interesting:
47
48 root@fireball / # emerge -pv =sys-devel/gcc-4.4.7 =sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4
49 =sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3
50
51 These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
52
53 Calculating dependencies... done!
54 [ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3:4.6 USE="gtk mudflap (multilib)
55 nls nptl openmp (-altivec) -cxx* -doc (-fixed-point) -fortran* -gcj
56 -graphite (-hardened) (-libssp) -multislot -nopie -nossp -objc -objc++
57 -objc-gc {-test} -vanilla" 24 kB
58 [ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-4.4.7:4.4 USE="gtk mudflap (multilib)
59 nls nptl openmp (-altivec) -cxx -doc (-fixed-point) -fortran -gcj
60 (-hardened) (-libssp) -multislot -nopie -nossp -objc -objc++ -objc-gc
61 {-test} -vanilla (-graphite%)" 0 kB
62 [ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4:4.5 USE="gtk mudflap (multilib)
63 nls nptl openmp (-altivec) -cxx -doc (-fixed-point) -fortran -gcj
64 (-hardened) (-libssp) -lto -multislot -nopie -nossp -objc -objc++
65 -objc-gc {-test} -vanilla" 0 kB
66
67 Total: 3 packages (3 reinstalls), Size of downloads: 24 kB
68
69 !!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
70 !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
71
72 sys-devel/gcc:4.6
73
74 (sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
75 (no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
76
77 (sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
78 sys-devel/gcc[fortran,openmp?] required by
79 (virtual/fortran-0::gentoo, installed)
80 >=sys-devel/gcc-4.2[cxx] required by
81 (sci-geosciences/googleearth-6.2.2.6613::gentoo, installed)
82
83
84 !!! Enabling --newuse and --update might solve this conflict.
85 !!! If not, it might help emerge to give a more specific suggestion.
86
87 root@fireball / #
88
89 I may need to make sense of this now. May not be the problem but
90 still. I don't have anything related to gcc in package.use either. I'm
91 not sure about the USE flag being changed on two but not the other.
92 When I logoff as mod, I'm going to try to recompile that older version.
93
94 Thoughts? Could that be the cause?
95
96 Dale
97
98 :-) :-)
99
100 --
101 I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Gcc compiling, is this normal? "J. Roeleveld" <joost@××××××××.org>