On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Steve Christensen <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK, I ran the
>
>
>> pkg update -v --accept --be-name=s11-fcs
>
> and after maybe eight hours, it ended with
Just eight hours?
Sir, you were lucky ...
Or you have a fast T2000.
> x11/xlock
> 0.5.11,5.11-0.151:20101026T201453Z ->
> 0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.1215:20110927T130052Z
> x11/xmag
> 1.0.3,5.11-0.151:20101026T201455Z ->
> 1.0.4,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.1215:20110927T130107Z
> x11/xvidtune
> 1.0.2,5.11-0.151:20101026T201502Z ->
> 1.0.2,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.1215:20110927T130200Z
> DOWNLOAD PKGS FILES XFER (MB)
> Completed 1079/1079 81689/81688 1323.0/1323.0
>
>
> Expected 81688 files, received 81689 files instead.
>
> Expected 1387250415 bytes, received 1387250435 bytes instead.
>
> pkg: An unexpected error happened while preparing for update:
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "/usr/bin/pkg", line 5954, in handle_errors
> __ret = func(*args, **kwargs)
> File "/usr/bin/pkg", line 5937, in main_func
> pargs=pargs, **opts)
> File "/usr/bin/pkg", line 2323, in update
> reject_list=reject_pats, update_index=update_index)
> File "/usr/bin/pkg", line 1576, in __api_op
> ret_code = __api_prepare(_op, _api_inst, accept=_accept)
> File "/usr/bin/pkg", line 1224, in __api_prepare
> api_inst.prepare()
> File "/usr/lib/python2.6/vendor-packages/pkg/client/api.py", line 2021, in
> prepare
> self._img.imageplan.preexecute()
> File "/usr/lib/python2.6/vendor-packages/pkg/client/imageplan.py", line
> 2842, in preexecute
> self.__progtrack.download_done()
> File "/usr/lib/python2.6/vendor-packages/pkg/client/progress.py", line
> 252, in download_done
> (self.dl_goal_nfiles, self.dl_cur_nfiles)
> AssertionError: Expected 81688 files but got 81689
>
>
> pkg: This is an internal error in pkg(5) version 630e1ffc7a19. Please log a
> Service Request about this issue including the information above and this
> message.
>
>
> My fault, my system, or a bug? Or don't worry about it?
Well, as per definition it cannot be a bug, because it is IPS ...
IPS hast no bugs.
Although it is only half a decade young.
It is always the users that are just not smart enough to manage using
it ..........
It only took 8 hours, so just try again.
Maybe your machine is too slow, because it only has 32 virtual CPU's
and only the tiny amount of 8GB or 16GB.
BTW: In the old days you would have been able to install a gcc built
on/for snv_175 on snv_151.
And maybe you would want to continue running snv_151 for a reason
(because maybe, you were using OI, after Sun/Oracle discontinued
OpenSolaris without making a statement! And didn't Oracle say: @The
kernel will be opened again after FCS is out blah blah ... ?@). Nobody
would have forced you to upgrade the entire OS to 175, _____YOU____
the administrator could have made that choice for yourself.
And probably libc and other core libs did not change interfaces from
151 to 175, so maybe it would work. Maybe not.
If not then you could still upgrade to 175.
That was the well-known good old SVR4 behavior.
What would have been saved?
* Many millions in $$$
* or not this cash, but engineering time could have been spent smarter
* administrators would not be under IPS's defined bunch of constraints
and limitations (that cannot even be switched off via the command
line, while every other packaging framework does offer options like
"--nodeps", they could still decide themselves, they would still be
the administrators _themselves_
* Sun/Oracle would have saved a few million hours of CPU time
* world would have spent billions of hours
Good luck!
-
%martin bochnig
http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/MartUX_OpenIndiana+oi_151a+SPARC+LiveDVD
http://www.youtube.com/user/MartUXopensolaris
http://www.facebook.com/pages/MartUX_SPARC-OpenIndiana/357912020962940
https://twitter.com/MartinBochnig
http://www.martux.org (new page not yet online, but pretty soon)
http://svr4.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
