On 30/01/2017 13:57, John Covici wrote: > On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 03:37:01 -0500, > Tuomo Hartikainen wrote: >> >> Hi John, >> >> On 2017-01-29 05:11, John Covici wrote: >>> Hi. I am having a couple of preserved rebuild problems which I have >>> no idea how to fix. >>> >>> The first one is like this: >>>>>> package: sys-libs/binutils-libs-2.27 >>> * - /usr/lib64/libbfd-2.25.1.so >>> * used by >>> /usr/lib64/binutils/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/2.25.1/libopcodes-2.25.1.so >>> (sys-devel/binutils-2.25.1-r1) >> >> I had this same loop last week, and I found this[1] forum thread >> helpful. Apparently on my and janos666's systems the >> /usr/lib64/libbfd-2.25.1.so library was erroneously left behind by a >> previous depclean. If you dare, first make sure the library is not owned >> by any current package: `equery b /usr/lib64/libbfd-2.25.1.so`. If it's >> not, removing the file manually should do the trick. >> >> Remember to take precautions though, khayyam suggests binpkg but I just >> took a copy of that library so I could put it back with a rescue system >> if binutils broke. >> >> [1]: https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1042488-start-0.html > > Unfortunately the file is owned by > sys-libs/binutils-libs-2.27 > > There is a 2.25 version as well. Now in the binutils itself I have > several versions at the same time. > But there is no other version of sys-libs/binutils-libs but the 2.27. > >
are you saying that you only have one version of binutils installed (2.27)? That seems to be the norm nowadays, the other slots are probably for "old stuff" IUf you have other versions' cruft still lying around in /usr/lib64/binutils/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/, then move that junk out the way and try again. It's very likely dynamic runtime nonsense that depclean didn't know about -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
