| 1 |
On 5/31/19 9:13 AM, Peter Humphrey wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday, 30 May 2019 16:32:01 BST »Q« wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> The 17.1 profiles are soon to be marked stable, so I went ahead and |
| 5 |
>> migrated a little over a week ago, following the draft news item Michał |
| 6 |
>> Górny recently posted to -dev. FWIW, the migration seemed to go |
| 7 |
>> smoothly and I haven't noticed anything breaking except |
| 8 |
>> app-office/kmymoney won't build, apparently because the ebuild expects |
| 9 |
>> something to be in /lib which isn't there any more. But one dev said |
| 10 |
>> it builds fine on his 17.1 test system, so I dunno. I filed a bug, |
| 11 |
>> <https://bugs.gentoo.org/686750>. |
| 12 |
> Encouraged by this, I tried the migration this morning. I followed the enews |
| 13 |
> item that Mick quoted - I even printed it to keep myself straight. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Before the start: |
| 16 |
> $ eselect profile show |
| 17 |
> Current /etc/portage/make.profile symlink: |
| 18 |
> default/linux/amd64/17.0/desktop/plasma |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I went through the migration, step by step, but after step 7, "unsymlink-lib |
| 21 |
> --finish", I found 110 files still in /lib and /usr/lib (list attached), of |
| 22 |
> the >3000 before the migration attempt, and /usr/local/lib still a symlink. |
| 23 |
> This can't be right, can it? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It's perfectly OK for there to still be stuff under /lib /usr/lib |
| 26 |
/usr/local/lib. These are supposed to be things which are arch |
| 27 |
independent, such as config stuff and scripts. However, I'm pretty sure |
| 28 |
none of them should still be a symlink. What's the link pointing to? |
| 29 |
I'd be tempted to revert the unsymlink. Did you check the output of |
| 30 |
"unsymlink-lib --analyze" first? |
Archives