On 08/26/14 09:01, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
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
I've made a third version of the patch that chases some recent updates
to the ports tree and can be found at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~nwhitehorn/pkg-new-abi-v3.diff
Please let me know if you run into any difficulties.
-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"
