Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Harry Putnam <reader@×××××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: emerge of `screen' possible perl mismatch
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 00:10:43
Message-Id: 87eg4rjnyr.fsf@reader.local.lan
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] Re: emerge of `screen' possible perl mismatch by James
1 James <wireless@×××××××××××.com> writes:
2
3 > Harry Putnam <reader <at> newsguy.com> writes:
4 >
5 >
6 >> Running gentoo thru vbox as guest on a Solaris host (openindiana)
7 >
8 >> ************************
9 >> XSParagraph.c: loadable library and perl binaries are mismatched
10 >> (got handshake key 0x7cc0000, needed 0x7c40000)
11 >> ************************
12
13 [...]
14
15 > Did you run perl-updater after upgrading perl?
16
17 I actually spent time looking for something by that name... but I see
18 now you really meant to say perl-cleaner, and the answer is no I did not.
19
20 Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> writes:
21
22 [...]
23
24 > re-emerge texinfo, it provides the XSParagraph libs.
25 >
26 > You could also try
27 >
28 > perl-cleaner --all
29
30 I've had a re-occurence of the same problem and wanted to tell you
31 even though this is an old thread that re-emerging installing texinfo
32 seems to have cleared things up... thank you.
33
34 I will do that perl-cleaner all if it re-occurs.
35
36 > just in case there are other similar issues with other packages.
37 > perl-cleaner might be able to find and repair those.
38 >
39 >
40 > Basically, texinfo was installed then a new version of perl was
41 > installed, and they do not match (that's what the handshake is for).
42 >
43 > I suppose this sort of issue is best handled with dependencies in the
44 > texinfo ebuild itself. Probably warrants a bug entry if re-emerging
45 > texinfo fixes it
46
47 waltdnes@××××××××.org writes:
48
49 > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 06:46:51AM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote
50 >
51 >> Anyone know what needs to be done here?
52 >>
53 >> Are there perl pkgs that need emerging first?
54 >
55 > Have you tried revdep-rebuild?
56
57 No didn't do that either... but see above what seems to have cleared
58 it up. Probably would have been spotted by revdep-rebuild too, I guess.