| 1 |
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 13 November 2009 14:39:52 Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:58:15 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > Almost invariably it's an automagic dependency where the offending |
| 5 |
>> > package is not in DEPEND. If you have been through the cycle at least |
| 6 |
>> > once, it is safe to delete /var/lib/portage/preserved_libs_registry and |
| 7 |
>> > continue on your way. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Won't that leave orphaned libraries hanging around since they aren't |
| 10 |
>> removed until emerges complete successfully? I've seen this behaviour |
| 11 |
>> before, where the list gets shorter each time and let it run its course. |
| 12 |
>> It may take longer, but you know it's safe. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Interesting point. My tests before indicated that a full --depclean sorted |
| 16 |
> everything out, but I can't be certain. @preserved-rebuild deletes orphans |
| 17 |
> once it's complete, but it would be nice to verify what happens otherwise. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Unfortunately, it's been a long time since any of my machines got stuck in |
| 20 |
> this loop. I must have earned some good joss in recent months... |
| 21 |
> -- |
| 22 |
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
If this problem is fundamentally due to dependencies not in DEPEND |
| 26 |
then is there any evidence that it's big a problem? I.e. - there |
| 27 |
aren't many packages that create the loop from what I've seen so far. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I've had this issue show up on all the machines I've updated this |
| 30 |
week, but it was always (I think) the same packages that caused the |
| 31 |
problems. As Neil suggested, at least on one machine the number of |
| 32 |
offending packages did seem to go down, but it would never go to zero |
| 33 |
as far as I can tell. (I did it 3 times on one box just to convince |
| 34 |
myself but emerging 50 packages gets boring.) While I haven't bug |
| 35 |
reported it I suspect someone will jump on this and a few days or |
| 36 |
weeks from now it won't exist, at least for these packages. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Other than disk space what's the technical downside of some libraries |
| 39 |
being stranded. Will this somehow leave applications pointing at old |
| 40 |
library binaries? |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
- Mark |
Archives