On 08/18/14 15:02, olli hauer wrote:
On 2014-08-18 18:15, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
On 08/14/14 13:40, olli hauer wrote:
On 2014-08-14 21:42, Bryan Drewery wrote:
On 8/14/2014 2:38 PM, olli hauer wrote:
On 2014-08-14 17:35, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
...
Something I've mentioned to Bapt a few times is that pkg needs a way to
have a list of accepted ABI strings. Then we could add both the old and
the new style as accepted (internally) so that old and new repositories
will continue to work.
Ups, rollback is not possible after the client database was updated.
Even by rollback and rebuild the package metadata the following error pops up.
~/pkg-static.old_ABI update -f
Updating repository catalogue
pkg-static: Repository str has a wrong packagesite, need to re-create database
Fetching meta.txz: 100% of 584 B
Fetching digests.txz: 100% of 43 kB
Fetching packagesite.txz: 100% of 138 kB
Adding new entries: 34%
pkg-static: wrong architecture: FreeBSD:8:amd64 instead of freebsd:8:x86:64
pkg-static: repository str contains packages with wrong ABI: FreeBSD:8:amd64
Adding new entries: 100%
pkg-static: Unable to update repository str
Hm. I'm not sure how to handle this. There are two places that emit hard errors
in such cases: pkg-add, which is fine since we have a workaround there, and
here. The check is at line 446 of libpkg/repo/binary/update.c (you can comment
it out for testing). For this one, there does not seem to be any good solution
and we need to find one since this is the same issue you ran into the upgrade
path.
Here are the two options I see. They are similar to each other, and we could do
both for some time.
1. Make an intermediate pkg that is otherwise unaltered but doesn't have this
check during updates and keep it in the tree for some substantial length of
time so most people have it by the time we want upgrades to the new ABI strings.
2. Set PKGNG_ALTABI globally on the ports tree for i386 and amd64 for some
period of time so that all built packages get the current ABI identifiers
rather than the new ones.
Any preference here? Or other options?
Hi Nathan,
Your suggestion 2) could do the trick, at last for current ports.
I will see if I can do some additional tests the next days, specially with
mixed ABI strings in the packages.
Did you have any chance to do the tests? I prepared a new version of the
patch at http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/pkg-new-abi-v2.diff that
marks all built binary packages for i386 and amd64 with the
freebsd:*:x86:* identifiers and so should prevent the old version of pkg
from bailing on a repository with mixed ABI strings. Testing would be
much appreciated.
-Nathan
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
