[gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent world update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the server, it complained that the databases were written with a different "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very strange to me. Thanks in advance for any suggestions. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On 9/26/2014 1:04 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 25/09/14 22:03, James wrote: >> I'd be better of with a fresh install of lilblue + musl + eudev >> is what you are really saying here? > that's the only usecase for eudev currently, yes, otherwise you have no > reason to switch Hi Samuli, So, is the above still true? eudev is looking more attractive every day... but can it continue to work and be supported if Lennart gets his way and upstream udev stops working without systemd? Just saw reference to the following thread on the debian-user list, and it includes a couple of responses from you (and an insult hurled at you from Lennart)... and I'm a bit worried that gentoo will be forced to swallow the systemd koolaid sometime maybe even sooner rather than later if Lennart succeeds in making udev work only with systemd, as he makes clear his desire to do just that here: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-May/019664.html Notably: Lennart said: >>> Also note that at that point we intend to move udev onto kdbus >>> as transport, and get rid of the userspace-to-userspace >>> netlink-based tranport udev used so far. Unless the >>> systemd-haters prepare another kdbus userspace until then this >>> will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd >>> systems with udev anymore starting at that point. Gentoo folks, >>> this is your wakeup call. Samuli replied: >> I've already set minimum kernel required to 2.6.39 in >= 213, and >> I'd be fine setting it even higher. Talking only of the udev bit >> here. I don't like dropping support for old versions, but if that's >> what has to be done, I'll go with that. Please, don't use this as >> an excuse to drop support for MinimalBuilds as described in wiki in >> some manner. As in, if it's still possible to use some kernel, like >> kernel with kdbus, and even if it requires an userspace library >> like 'libsystemd-something' to go with it, and still get a udev one >> way or another, that can run standalone, we are all good. Lennart responded: > You need the userspace code to set up the bus and its policy and > handle activation. That's not a trivial task. For us, that's what > sytemd does in PID 1. You'd need to come up with an alternative for > that. Samuli said: >> I'd really hate to be forced to fork (or carry huge patchset) >> unnecessarily (I'm not a systemd hater, I'm not a eudev lover, I'm >> simply working on what is provided to me by *you*, udev upstream) Lennart replied: > Oh god. You know, if you come me like this as blame me that I would > "force" you to do something, then you just piss me off and make me > ignore you. > > Anyway, as soon as kdbus is merged this i how we will maintain udev, > you have ample time to figure out some solution that works for you, > but we will not support the udev-on-netlink case anymore. I see three > options: a) fork things, b) live with systemd, c) if hate systemd > that much, but love udev so much, then implement an alternative > userspace for kdbus to do initialiuzation/policy/activation. > > Also note that this will not be a change that is just internal > between udev and libudev. We expect that clients will soonishly just > start doing normal bus calls to the new udev, like they'd do them to > any other system service instead of using libudev.
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for beta3, provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can delete beta2. 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent world > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the > server, it complained that the databases were written with a different > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very > strange to me. > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > -- > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > How do > you spend it? > > John Covici > cov...@ccs.covici.com > >
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. Vladimir Romanov wrote: > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for beta3, > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can delete > beta2. > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent world > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a different > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very > > strange to me. > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > -- > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > How do > > you spend it? > > > > John Covici > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in different slots. 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for beta3, > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can delete > > beta2. > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent > world > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a different > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very > > > strange to me. > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > -- > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > How do > > > you spend it? > > > > > > John Covici > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > -- > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > How do > you spend it? > > John Covici > cov...@ccs.covici.com > >
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the directory /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is all, is there a problem with the ebuilds or something? Vladimir Romanov wrote: > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in different > slots. > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for beta3, > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can delete > > > beta2. > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent > > world > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a different > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > > How do > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > How do > > you spend it? > > > > John Covici > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by emerge =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the directory > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is all, is > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in > different > > slots. > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for beta3, > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can > delete > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent > > > world > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start > the > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a > different > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool > requires > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as > a > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. > So > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is > very > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question > is: > > > > > How do > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > How do > > > you spend it? > > > > > > John Covici > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > -- > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > How do > you spend it? > > John Covici > cov...@ccs.covici.com > >
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
What it does then is delete the beta3 and give me only beta2. This is what I had done to fix my original problem, I can show you the build log for beta3 if that would help. I am using gentoo-unstable, but that should be obvious. Vladimir Romanov wrote: > You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by emerge > =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) > > 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > > > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the directory > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is all, is > > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in > > different > > > slots. > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for beta3, > > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can > > delete > > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent > > > > world > > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start > > the > > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a > > different > > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool > > requires > > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as > > a > > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. > > So > > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is > > very > > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question > > is: > > > > > > How do > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > > How do > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > How do > > you spend it? > > > > John Covici > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Well... then we need someone, who is more professional, since AFAIK multiple postgresql's can be on one system in several slots. Maybe (as it is beta, slots are the same, therefore new deletes old and vice versa)? 2014-11-10 16:47 GMT+05:00 : > What it does then is delete the beta3 and give me only beta2. This is > what I had done to fix my original problem, I can show you the build log > for beta3 if that would help. I am using gentoo-unstable, but that > should be obvious. > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by emerge > > =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) > > > > 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the directory > > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is all, is > > > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in > > > different > > > > slots. > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for > beta3, > > > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can > > > delete > > > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my > recent > > > > > world > > > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to > start > > > the > > > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a > > > different > > > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool > > > requires > > > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. > So as > > > a > > > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked > again. > > > So > > > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this > is > > > very > > > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The > question > > > is: > > > > > > > How do > > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question > is: > > > > > How do > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > How do > > > you spend it? > > > > > > John Covici > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > -- > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > How do > you spend it? > > John Covici > cov...@ccs.covici.com > >
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 6:04 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > > eudev is looking more attractive every day... but can it continue to > work and be supported if Lennart gets his way and upstream udev stops > working without systemd? > Well, there are no plans to make udev stop working without systemd as far as I can tell. HOWEVER, there ARE plans to require using kdbus to communicate with udev, and for that to work there needs to be a userspace initialization of kdbus/etc. Udev is probably just be the tip of the iceberg. Lots of packages use dbus, and it seems likely to me that many will start switching to kdbus. The fact that it is going to be a standard kernel IPC mechanism also means that packages that have avoided dbus in the interests of not having large dependencies may start picking it up as well - it might be used even on embedded systems. I have no idea how much work is involved or if anybody else is interested in doing it. If busybox is willing to have their mdev module, I don't see why they wouldn't want a kdbus module to go along with that. However, that is speaking mostly out of ignorance, and somebody needs to write the code. I don't think avoiding kdbus is going to be a viable long-term solution. Folks who don't want to run systemd need to start planning for this, and cross "needs dbus" off their list of reasons not to use systemd. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Well, I found the old binaries in my backups and did the deed, the only problems, was that the old data directory did not contain any .conf files, so I copied the new ones into the old data directory and it was then happy. I m not sure what happened to the .conf files in the old data directory, but they had not been there for quite a while, so maybe this was a problem with the arlier beta. Very strange but it looks good. Thanks for your help. Vladimir Romanov wrote: > Well... then we need someone, who is more professional, since AFAIK > multiple postgresql's can be on one system in several slots. Maybe (as it > is beta, slots are the same, therefore new deletes old and vice versa)? > > 2014-11-10 16:47 GMT+05:00 : > > > What it does then is delete the beta3 and give me only beta2. This is > > what I had done to fix my original problem, I can show you the build log > > for beta3 if that would help. I am using gentoo-unstable, but that > > should be obvious. > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by emerge > > > =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the directory > > > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is all, is > > > > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in > > > > different > > > > > slots. > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for > > beta3, > > > > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you can > > > > delete > > > > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my > > recent > > > > > > world > > > > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to > > start > > > > the > > > > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a > > > > different > > > > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool > > > > requires > > > > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. > > So as > > > > a > > > > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked > > again. > > > > So > > > > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this > > is > > > > very > > > > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The > > question > > > > is: > > > > > > > > How do > > > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question > > is: > > > > > > How do > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > > How do > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > How do > > you spend it? > > > > John Covici > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Well, i think i understand what happens (through i am not sure) - i was upgrading 9.3 to 9.4 - they're installed in different slots, so i just istalled two postgresql's in one time. You are upgrading 9.4 to 9.4 - so they are in one slot and can not be installed in one time. But then yes, one can't upgrade the base. 2014-11-10 17:59 GMT+05:00 : > Well, I found the old binaries in my backups and did the deed, the only > problems, was that the old data directory did not contain any .conf > files, so I copied the new ones into the old data directory and it was > then happy. I m not sure what happened to the .conf files in the old > data directory, but they had not been there for quite a while, so maybe > this was a problem with the arlier beta. Very strange but it looks > good. > > Thanks for your help. > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > Well... then we need someone, who is more professional, since AFAIK > > multiple postgresql's can be on one system in several slots. Maybe (as it > > is beta, slots are the same, therefore new deletes old and vice versa)? > > > > 2014-11-10 16:47 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > What it does then is delete the beta3 and give me only beta2. This is > > > what I had done to fix my original problem, I can show you the build > log > > > for beta3 if that would help. I am using gentoo-unstable, but that > > > should be obvious. > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by > emerge > > > > =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the > directory > > > > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is > all, is > > > > > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in > > > > > different > > > > > > slots. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my > problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for > > > beta3, > > > > > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you > can > > > > > delete > > > > > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my > > > recent > > > > > > > world > > > > > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to > > > start > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with > a > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade > tool > > > > > requires > > > > > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. > > > So as > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked > > > again. > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but > this > > > is > > > > > very > > > > > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The > > > question > > > > > is: > > > > > > > > > How do > > > > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The > question > > > is: > > > > > > > How do > > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question > is: > > > > > How do > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: > > > How do > > > you spend it? > > > > > > John Covici > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Then they should not change the catalog version -- what is that, anyway? Vladimir Romanov wrote: > Well, i think i understand what happens (through i am not sure) - i was > upgrading 9.3 to 9.4 - they're installed in different slots, so i just > istalled two postgresql's in one time. You are upgrading 9.4 to 9.4 - so > they are in one slot and can not be installed in one time. > > But then yes, one can't upgrade the base. > > 2014-11-10 17:59 GMT+05:00 : > > > Well, I found the old binaries in my backups and did the deed, the only > > problems, was that the old data directory did not contain any .conf > > files, so I copied the new ones into the old data directory and it was > > then happy. I m not sure what happened to the .conf files in the old > > data directory, but they had not been there for quite a while, so maybe > > this was a problem with the arlier beta. Very strange but it looks > > good. > > > > Thanks for your help. > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > Well... then we need someone, who is more professional, since AFAIK > > > multiple postgresql's can be on one system in several slots. Maybe (as it > > > is beta, slots are the same, therefore new deletes old and vice versa)? > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:47 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > What it does then is delete the beta3 and give me only beta2. This is > > > > what I had done to fix my original problem, I can show you the build > > log > > > > for beta3 if that would help. I am using gentoo-unstable, but that > > > > should be obvious. > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by > > emerge > > > > > =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the > > directory > > > > > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is > > all, is > > > > > > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers in > > > > > > different > > > > > > > slots. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my > > problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade for > > > > beta3, > > > > > > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then you > > can > > > > > > delete > > > > > > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my > > > > recent > > > > > > > > world > > > > > > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to > > > > start > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written with > > a > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade > > tool > > > > > > requires > > > > > > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. > > > > So as > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked > > > > again. > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but > > this > > > > is > > > > > > very > > > > > > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The > > > > question > > > > > > is: > > > > > > > > > > How do > > > > > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The > > question > > > > is: > > > > > > > > How do > > > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question > > is: > > > > > > How do > > > > > > you spend it? > > > > > > > > > > > > John Covici > > > > > > cov...@ccs.covici.com > > > > > > > > >
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
On 11/10/2014 06:04 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent world > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the > server, it complained that the databases were written with a different > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very > strange to me. > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > pg_upgrade has always been a PITA for me. There's an easier way that always works: run pg_dumpall, upgrade postgres, and then restore the dump file. If your databases are small enough, it's much less stressful, and it works for major version bumps as well. If you're worried about overwriting your data, you could always back up the beta2 binary files, and then create empty databases under beta3 before restoring.
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 11/10/2014 06:04 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent world > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start the > > server, it complained that the databases were written with a different > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade tool requires > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the database. So as a > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things worked again. So > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, but this is very > > strange to me. > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > pg_upgrade has always been a PITA for me. There's an easier way that > always works: run pg_dumpall, upgrade postgres, and then restore the > dump file. > > If your databases are small enough, it's much less stressful, and it > works for major version bumps as well. > > If you're worried about overwriting your data, you could always back up > the beta2 binary files, and then create empty databases under beta3 > before restoring. Thanks, maybe I will do that next time. -- Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici cov...@ccs.covici.com
[gentoo-user] udev update
Hi, Checking the news (eselect news read), I see that an upgrade to udev-217 might break firmware loading, so the news tagged "2014-11-07-udev-upgrade" says that a kernel >= 3.7 should be configured to: CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER=n Is it that simple? Trying a new kernel build using "menuconfig", it says that CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER depends on CONFIG_FW_LOADER, and this one depends on a huge list of other configuration elements. Any thoughts? Thanks, Francisco
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On 11/10/2014 7:30 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > Well, there are no plans to make udev stop working without systemd as > far as I can tell. HOWEVER, there ARE plans to require using kdbus to > communicate with udev, and for that to work there needs to be a > userspace initialization of kdbus/etc. So... you're saying I'm mis-reading this: > Unless the systemd-haters prepare another kdbus userspace until then > this will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd > systems with udev anymore starting at that point. Gentoo folks, this > is your wakeup call. and that it doesn't mean that "udev will stop working without systemd", or, as Lennart said, "... we will not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore staryting at that point (when udev is moved onto kdbus as transport)? Or... maybe eudev (or mdev, or both) could or would have to be [re]written so as to be fulfill the 'kdbus userspace' role Lennart mentions above? Being 'not a dev' (or programmer at all), I guess it is entirely possible it isn't as bad as it sounds, but his "Gentoo folks, this is your wake-up call." comment is what really stands out to me, as a gentoo user. I don't care about dbus/kdbus - if it is in the kernel, and under Linus' control, and I need to enable it to use my systems, that is fine with me. What I want is to always have the option - a *stable* option - to not have to install/use systemd if I don't want to.
Re: [gentoo-user] udev update
On 11/10/2014 8:21 AM, Francisco Ares wrote: > Checking the news (eselect news read), I see that an upgrade to udev-217 > might break firmware loading, so the news tagged > "2014-11-07-udev-upgrade" says that a kernel >= 3.7 should be configured to: > > CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER=n > > Is it that simple? Trying a new kernel build using "menuconfig", it > says that CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER depends on CONFIG_FW_LOADER, and > this one depends on a huge list of other configuration elements. > > Any thoughts? Ueah... UGH... thanks Lennart/systemd devs for yet another thing to have to worry about...
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 8:23 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 11/10/2014 7:30 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> Well, there are no plans to make udev stop working without systemd as >> far as I can tell. HOWEVER, there ARE plans to require using kdbus to >> communicate with udev, and for that to work there needs to be a >> userspace initialization of kdbus/etc. > > So... you're saying I'm mis-reading this: Somewhat. > >> Unless the systemd-haters prepare another kdbus userspace until then >> this will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd >> systems with udev anymore starting at that point. Gentoo folks, this >> is your wakeup call. > > and that it doesn't mean that "udev will stop working without systemd", > or, as Lennart said, "... we will not support non-systemd systems with > udev anymore staryting at that point (when udev is moved onto kdbus as > transport)? The part that you're missing is the "Unless the systemd-haters [sic] prepare another kdbus userspace." Like many parts of the kernel, kdbus needs initialization from userspace. This is no different than what udev does in the first place - the kernel has device drivers, but SOMETHING has to populate /dev with device nodes if you want to use them. Now /dev has been around since the dawn of time, so we get our choice of 47 different ways of doing that. Kdbus hasn't been around for long at all, so nobody has really written any standalone processes for initializing it. As far as I can tell, udev will work just fine as long as something sets up kdbus. I'd have to study it a bit more to understand if there is some reason that this something has to be PID 1. I don't care for the attitude/etc and especially the treatment of Samuli (who seems to do his best to cooperate with everybody in this contentious area), but stepping back I can't really say that a project deciding to move to a new API based on a new IPC feature is all that controversial on its own. Normally when this sort of thing happens there are a bunch of projects built to support such a new kernel feature in userspace. I think the main reasons that we are where we are right now are: 1. All the big distros are moving to systemd anyway, so they don't really have much of an itch to scratch here. 2. Most folks not interested in systemd seem to generally not be interested in dbus at all. I think there is a lot of hope that this problem will just go away, and I suspect that if anything it will get a lot worse. 3. Those who aren't using systemd to some extent are a bit split across udev, eudev, and busybox mdev. This does divide up the labor pool a bit and means interests aren't 100% aligned. The situation doesn't really see irreparable to me, but it does seem like there is something to be done. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] udev update
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 11/10/2014 8:21 AM, Francisco Ares wrote: >> Checking the news (eselect news read), I see that an upgrade to udev-217 >> might break firmware loading, so the news tagged >> "2014-11-07-udev-upgrade" says that a kernel >= 3.7 should be configured to: >> >> CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER=n >> >> Is it that simple? Trying a new kernel build using "menuconfig", it >> says that CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER depends on CONFIG_FW_LOADER, and >> this one depends on a huge list of other configuration elements. >> >> Any thoughts? > > Ueah... UGH... thanks Lennart/systemd devs for yet another thing to have > to worry about... > >From the kernel config instructions (something not written by the systemd >devs): This option enables / disables the invocation of user-helper (e.g. udev) for loading firmware files as a fallback after the direct file loading in kernel fails. The user-mode helper is no longer required unless you have a special firmware file that resides in a non-standard path. Moreover, the udev support has been deprecated upstream. Announcing a feature as deprecated and later dropping it is hardly controversial. You chose a distro that gives you a choice of things like your udev implementation and your kernel implementation (or using udev at all), and as a result you get to deal with the fact that some versions of the one have constraints on how you use the other. If you ran a distro like Ubuntu you wouldn't have to worry about any of this, as you'd use the udev they gave you and the precompiled kernel they gave you and the world's greatest desktop environment and you'd be happy with it. Anybody who has run Gentoo for a long time knows that from time to time some change comes along and you'll just have to deal with it - you can't just ignore things like firmware-loading on Gentoo the way you can with some other distros. Of course, nothing prevents anybody from creating a preconfigured kernel for Gentoo. There is genkernel of course, though I think we probably could do better. Most seem to be happy just managing their own kernel configurations, and I think that is why nobody has bothered to spend much time perfecting a canned kernel. Going back to the original question, yes - it is that simple. Dependencies are just dependencies - you only have to worry about them when you turn things ON. -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] udev update
2014-11-10 12:37 GMT-02:00 Rich Freeman : > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Tanstaafl > wrote: > > On 11/10/2014 8:21 AM, Francisco Ares wrote: > >> Checking the news (eselect news read), I see that an upgrade to udev-217 > >> might break firmware loading, so the news tagged > >> "2014-11-07-udev-upgrade" says that a kernel >= 3.7 should be > configured to: > >> > >> CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER=n > >> > >> Is it that simple? Trying a new kernel build using "menuconfig", it > >> says that CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER depends on CONFIG_FW_LOADER, and > >> this one depends on a huge list of other configuration elements. > >> > >> Any thoughts? > > > > Ueah... UGH... thanks Lennart/systemd devs for yet another thing to have > > to worry about... > > > > From the kernel config instructions (something not written by the systemd > devs): > This option enables / disables the invocation of user-helper > (e.g. udev) for loading firmware files as a fallback after the > direct file loading in kernel fails. The user-mode helper is > no longer required unless you have a special firmware file that > resides in a non-standard path. Moreover, the udev support has > been deprecated upstream. > > Announcing a feature as deprecated and later dropping it is hardly > controversial. You chose a distro that gives you a choice of things > like your udev implementation and your kernel implementation (or using > udev at all), and as a result you get to deal with the fact that some > versions of the one have constraints on how you use the other. If you > ran a distro like Ubuntu you wouldn't have to worry about any of this, > as you'd use the udev they gave you and the precompiled kernel they > gave you and the world's greatest desktop environment and you'd be > happy with it. Anybody who has run Gentoo for a long time knows that > from time to time some change comes along and you'll just have to deal > with it - you can't just ignore things like firmware-loading on Gentoo > the way you can with some other distros. > > Of course, nothing prevents anybody from creating a preconfigured > kernel for Gentoo. There is genkernel of course, though I think we > probably could do better. Most seem to be happy just managing their > own kernel configurations, and I think that is why nobody has bothered > to spend much time perfecting a canned kernel. > > Going back to the original question, yes - it is that simple. > Dependencies are just dependencies - you only have to worry about them > when you turn things ON. > > -- > Rich > > Ok, I will try. So, if I understood something, I will probably have to check this configuration entry every time I build a new kernel from now on, because "menuconfig" will probably set this on because of its dependencies, is this correct? Thanks! Francisco
Re: [gentoo-user] udev update
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Francisco Ares wrote: > > So, if I understood something, I will probably have to check this > configuration entry every time I build a new kernel from now on, because > "menuconfig" will probably set this on because of its dependencies, is this > correct? > That depends on how you configure your kernels. If you start from your last kernel config then the setting won't change. If you create a new config every time, then it depends on how you're creating it. Dependencies never cause something to be turned on or off. You have that a bit backwards conceptually. KDE depends on glibc, which means you can't install KDE if you don't have glibc present. That doesn't mean that it is impossible to build a system which contains glibc and not KDE. Now, if you were talking about reverse-deps that would be another matter. The kernel config tools won't let you disable a setting which is a dependency of another setting, though I believe they generally don't automatically turn things on either. Dependency-management in the kernel is fairly primitive in general - it does a somewhat-decent job of not letting you shoot yourself in the foot, as long as you don't go manually editing .config files, but it can be a bit of a pain turning on things that are missing dependencies. It definitely isn't targeted at the "end user." -- Rich
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On 10/11/14 13:04, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 9/26/2014 1:04 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: >> On 25/09/14 22:03, James wrote: >>> I'd be better of with a fresh install of lilblue + musl + eudev >>> is what you are really saying here? >> that's the only usecase for eudev currently, yes, otherwise you have no >> reason to switch > Hi Samuli, > > So, is the above still true? Yes, it's still true, there is no reason to change away from sys-fs/udev except for sys-libs/musl use, and even then, I'd be happy to accept musl compability patches for sys-fs/udev's ebuild, but the sys-libs/musl maintainer decided to put his work to sys-fs/eudev instead. So unless some user does the work for him... I wouldn't worry about it at all, there is no way *sys-fs/udev ebuild* will ever need systemd. There might be a news item later, with instructions on moving to something else, but that's not something we are even planning at the moment, so sys-fs/udev is still the de facto proper upstream /dev manager.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On 11/10/2014 10:48 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote: > I wouldn't worry about it at all, there is no way *sys-fs/udev > ebuild* will ever need systemd. There might be a news item later, > with instructions on moving to something else, but that's not > something we are even planning at the moment, so sys-fs/udev is still > the de facto proper upstream /dev manager. Well, that sounds reassuring, so thanks very much for this and you're hard work for all of us non-programmer gentoo users, it is much appreciated! I guess Lennart was just using words that I read the wrong way... even now if I re-read his posts, it sounds to me like he is saying 'no more separate udev without systemd ultimately'... and I know for sure he has made exactly this comments in the past, but that was admittedly 1 year or two ago...
[gentoo-user] Anyone using Veeam to backup Gentoo VMs on vmware hosts?
Wondering if this is supported? Thanks
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone using Veeam to backup Gentoo VMs on vmware hosts?
On 10-Nov-14 18:06, Tanstaafl wrote: Wondering if this is supported? It is supported, but not on ESXi-hypervisor (free) anymore. AFAIK only Trilead VM-Explorer works on free-ESXi (and command line tools i.e. ghettoVCB). Jarry -- ___ This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone using Veeam to backup Gentoo VMs on vmware hosts?
On 11/10/2014 1:21 PM, Jarry wrote: > On 10-Nov-14 18:06, Tanstaafl wrote: >> Wondering if this is supported? > > It is supported, but not on ESXi-hypervisor (free) anymore. > AFAIK only Trilead VM-Explorer works on free-ESXi (and command > line tools i.e. ghettoVCB). Cool, thanks (we have the paid version)... Which version of vm tools do you use on your gentoo? I'm using open-vm-tools, hopefully that is good enough. Thanks again!
[gentoo-user] Re: gcc 4.7.3 --> 4.8.3
Peter Humphrey prh.myzen.co.uk> writes: > > You should be able to just switch to 4.8 without rebuilding anything. > > That's what I did. Of course it can't hurt to rebuild everything, but > > you can schedule that for later (like an overnight rebuild of world > > with --keep-going). It's not critical to do it immediately. That's exactly what I did, more or less. All seems fine. > I'd have thought you needed to emerge -e world if you really want to be > protected. Yea, maybe. I read the man page on emptytree. I get it actually replaces by a "reinstall". Does this do more than if I just reboot after emerge @system @world and then reboot? I'd be curious to know exactly what reinstall does that is not covered by just starting up a given code again? Is it that it forces a reinstall and stop/starts the binary without rebooting? Rebooting catches *everything* even better than --emptytree ? James
Re: [gentoo-user] udev update
2014-11-10 13:42 GMT-02:00 Rich Freeman : > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Francisco Ares wrote: > > > > So, if I understood something, I will probably have to check this > > configuration entry every time I build a new kernel from now on, because > > "menuconfig" will probably set this on because of its dependencies, is > this > > correct? > > > > That depends on how you configure your kernels. If you start from > your last kernel config then the setting won't change. If you create > a new config every time, then it depends on how you're creating it. > > Dependencies never cause something to be turned on or off. You have > that a bit backwards conceptually. KDE depends on glibc, which means > you can't install KDE if you don't have glibc present. That doesn't > mean that it is impossible to build a system which contains glibc and > not KDE. > > Now, if you were talking about reverse-deps that would be another > matter. The kernel config tools won't let you disable a setting which > is a dependency of another setting, though I believe they generally > don't automatically turn things on either. Dependency-management in > the kernel is fairly primitive in general - it does a somewhat-decent > job of not letting you shoot yourself in the foot, as long as you > don't go manually editing .config files, but it can be a bit of a pain > turning on things that are missing dependencies. It definitely isn't > targeted at the "end user." > > -- > Rich > > I guess that last statement includes "genkernel" users. Thanks, Francisco
[gentoo-user] Re: udev update
Rich Freeman gentoo.org> writes: > Of course, nothing prevents anybody from creating a preconfigured > kernel for Gentoo. There is genkernel of course, though I think we > probably could do better. Most seem to be happy just managing their > own kernel configurations, and I think that is why nobody has bothered > to spend much time perfecting a canned kernel. > Rich https://github.com/canek-pelaez/kerninst Although Canek has created a nice system that addresses not only new kernels, but also the other critical steps one has to at least consider for a successful kernel upgrade, his solution is targeted at a bit more complex situation than the average user's needs, such as Francisco situation. The old usage of : make oldconfig make menuconfig Is probably is in need of some extra "syntax_strokes" to create a copy and paste style of kernel upgrade, should genkernel not be sufficient. There's grub2 to consider, (u)efi bios, mbr, initramfs and probably other things to think about. Maybe somebody smarter than me (not really hard to find on this list) could modify Canek's script for the general user case of simply upgrading gentoo-sources. It could be put on the gentoo-wiki for folks to try out or packaged as an overlay?. Feedback would (eventually) result in a version quite cool and moderized, without messing with genkernel. Once it becomes "robust" it would be up to Sven & company to decide if it makes the handbook, as a replacement or alternative to genkernel. Just a thought, but we get this sort of problem, quite often on this list I think we should at least have a gentoo wiki page that folks can read and learn about the general idea on different methods and the caveats therein to kernel upgrades on Gentoo. (pist) there could even be a link to all the systemd and openrc pages that come into play? James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc 4.7.3 --> 4.8.3
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:52:09 + (UTC), James wrote: > > I'd have thought you needed to emerge -e world if you really want to > > be protected. > > Yea, maybe. I read the man page on emptytree. I get it actually replaces > by a "reinstall". Does this do more than if I just reboot after > > emerge @system @world and then reboot? > > I'd be curious to know exactly what reinstall does that is not > covered by just starting up a given code again? > > Is it that it forces a reinstall and stop/starts the binary without > rebooting? > > Rebooting catches *everything* even better than --emptytree ? --emptytree has nothing to do with rebooting. It simply forces emerge to rebuild everything in @world and their dependencies. Once you have done that, you will have daemons still running the old code, which you could fix with a reboot, or you could run checkrestart and restart only the affected programs. After an emerge -e @world, a reboot is probably best, another reason to avoid the unnecessary step of emerge -e @world in the first place. -- Neil Bothwick Top Oxymorons Number 20: Synthetic natural gas pgpdYumJ_8evV.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] qwinff: an excellent qt gui front-end for ffmpeg
I heard about qwinff in a linux podcast and I'm happy I decided to try it. It's not in portage or layman, but installing it is so trivial I'll describe how I did it: Download the source file here: https://github.com/qwinff/qwinff/ by clicking the "Download ZIP" button on the right side of the web page. Unzip the file in /usr/local/src (or wherever you keep source code). Assuming you're doing this as root: #mkdir /usr/local/src (if it doesn't exist) #cd /usr/local/src #unzip /qwinff-master.zip (the source file you downloaded) #cd qwinff-master/ #make PREFIX=/usr/local USE_LIBNOTIFY=1 (read the file "INSTALL.txt") #make PREFIX=/usr/local install If all goes well you should be able to run qwinff from a bash prompt, or add a custom menu item using the file "qwinff.desktop", which is installed by the qwinff package. If you see compile errors about undefined symbols or missing headers then you'll need to emerge the appropriate qt packages from portage. I got no compile errors because I already had all the qt packages installed for other purposes. (BTW this is not a kde app. You need only the qt packages to run it on gnome or any other DE (or on *no* DE if you're my evil twin Walter ;) Ask if you need help. IMO it's worth your trouble if you convert video files to other formats :)
[gentoo-user] Re: qwinff: an excellent qt gui front-end for ffmpeg
walt gmail.com> writes: > I heard about qwinff in a linux podcast and I'm happy I decided to try it. > > It's not in portage or layman, but installing it is so trivial > I'll describe how I did it: Well, if I can figure out how to "hack" together simple ebuilds, so can you (if you dont know already). The more folks putting software into ebuilds and making them avaialbe, either github or overlay (sunshine) the better off we all are. hth, James
[gentoo-user] glibc-2.20 and intel microcode
I've finnally detected the root cause of glibc-2.20 broken my system: glibc-2.20 start using TLX instruction which is disabled by microcode update. disabling microcode update brings my system back to live! so, there is either a bug in CPU , nor glibc has borken CPU feature detection.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 05:48:49PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote > I wouldn't worry about it at all, there is no way *sys-fs/udev ebuild* > will ever need systemd. There might be a news item later, with > instructions on moving to something else, but that's not something we > are even planning at the moment, so sys-fs/udev is still the de facto > proper upstream /dev manager. What worries me is that Lennart has been able to get modifications done to the kernel, e.g. kdbus. I know this'll sound paranoid, but how long before he pushes a patch that requires systemd to run the linux kernel? -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On 11/11/14 07:20, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 05:48:49PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote > >> I wouldn't worry about it at all, there is no way *sys-fs/udev ebuild* >> will ever need systemd. There might be a news item later, with >> instructions on moving to something else, but that's not something we >> are even planning at the moment, so sys-fs/udev is still the de facto >> proper upstream /dev manager. > What worries me is that Lennart has been able to get modifications > done to the kernel, e.g. kdbus. I know this'll sound paranoid, but how > long before he pushes a patch that requires systemd to run the linux > kernel? > I expect systemd-udevd to be migrated into kdbus, which means libudev, libgudev-1.0 and the systemd-udevd binary itself will likely need the libsystemd-bus library, which we will then package and ship together with sys-fs/udev Or if systemd-udevd binary starts requiring a running service of some of the systemd services, then we will make those available as well and run the from the udev-init-scripts, or possibly even adjust sys-apps/openrc to compensate for the inadequaties Just trying to say, that even with kdbus pending, I'm not worried at all - Samuli
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev (viable) alternatives ?
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 05:48:49PM +0200, Samuli Suominen wrote > >> I wouldn't worry about it at all, there is no way *sys-fs/udev ebuild* >> will ever need systemd. There might be a news item later, with >> instructions on moving to something else, but that's not something we >> are even planning at the moment, so sys-fs/udev is still the de facto >> proper upstream /dev manager. > > What worries me is that Lennart has been able to get modifications > done to the kernel, e.g. kdbus. I know this'll sound paranoid, but how > long before he pushes a patch that requires systemd to run the linux > kernel? Then you can take the very last commit to Linus' Git repository before that hypothetical change, and fork the Linux kernel into whatever direction your crazy heart desires. Business as usual in the Free Software world. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] glibc-2.20 and intel microcode
On 11/11/14 05:49, micro...@fedoraproject.org wrote: > I've finnally detected the root cause of glibc-2.20 broken my system: > glibc-2.20 start using TLX instruction which is disabled by microcode update. > > disabling microcode update brings my system back to live! > > so, there is either a bug in CPU , nor glibc has borken CPU feature detection. > > > See, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=528712 It's likely you are hitting a kernel bug
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: gcc 4.7.3 --> 4.8.3
On 2014-11-10 23:23, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:52:09 + (UTC), James wrote: > I'd have thought you needed to emerge -e world if you really want to > be protected. Yea, maybe. I read the man page on emptytree. I get it actually replaces by a "reinstall". Does this do more than if I just reboot after emerge @system @world and then reboot? I'd be curious to know exactly what reinstall does that is not covered by just starting up a given code again? Is it that it forces a reinstall and stop/starts the binary without rebooting? Rebooting catches *everything* even better than --emptytree ? --emptytree has nothing to do with rebooting. It simply forces emerge to rebuild everything in @world and their dependencies. Once you have done that, you will have daemons still running the old code, which you could fix with a reboot, or you could run checkrestart and restart only the affected programs. After an emerge -e @world, a reboot is probably best, another reason to avoid the unnecessary step of emerge -e @world in the first place. Or you can check the list of processes with deleted libraries and restart those. lsof -n | grep 'DEL.*lib'
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
On Monday 10 Nov 2014 13:16:25 cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > On 11/10/2014 06:04 AM, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In my recent > > > world update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried to start > > > the server, it complained that the databases were written with a > > > different "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the pg_upgrade > > > tool requires both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the > > > database. So as a temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things > > > worked again. So what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like > > > pg, but this is very strange to me. > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > pg_upgrade has always been a PITA for me. There's an easier way that > > always works: run pg_dumpall, upgrade postgres, and then restore the > > dump file. > > > > If your databases are small enough, it's much less stressful, and it > > works for major version bumps as well. > > > > If you're worried about overwriting your data, you could always back up > > the beta2 binary files, and then create empty databases under beta3 > > before restoring. > > Thanks, maybe I will do that next time. You may also want to file a bug? There may be need for a elog pre-emerge message or some such for users to know how to deal with this in a gentoo system without tearing their hair out. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] how to upgrade postgresql under gentoo
On Monday, November 10, 2014 08:06:50 AM cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote: > Then they should not change the catalog version -- what is that, anyway? You are using a Beta-version. Those are under development and NOT suited for production. If you use a beta-version of any software package, you run the risk of loosing your data. I am not surprised that the layout of the on-disk storage changes between beta versions while the devs try to implement new functionality. You might even have been running with an incompatible combination in the previous beta. -- Joost > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > Well, i think i understand what happens (through i am not sure) - i was > > upgrading 9.3 to 9.4 - they're installed in different slots, so i just > > istalled two postgresql's in one time. You are upgrading 9.4 to 9.4 - so > > they are in one slot and can not be installed in one time. > > > > But then yes, one can't upgrade the base. > > > > 2014-11-10 17:59 GMT+05:00 : > > > Well, I found the old binaries in my backups and did the deed, the only > > > problems, was that the old data directory did not contain any .conf > > > files, so I copied the new ones into the old data directory and it was > > > then happy. I m not sure what happened to the .conf files in the old > > > data directory, but they had not been there for quite a while, so maybe > > > this was a problem with the arlier beta. Very strange but it looks > > > good. > > > > > > Thanks for your help. > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > Well... then we need someone, who is more professional, since AFAIK > > > > multiple postgresql's can be on one system in several slots. Maybe (as > > > > it > > > > is beta, slots are the same, therefore new deletes old and vice > > > > versa)? > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:47 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > What it does then is delete the beta3 and give me only beta2. This > > > > > is > > > > > what I had done to fix my original problem, I can show you the build > > > > > > log > > > > > > > > for beta3 if that would help. I am using gentoo-unstable, but that > > > > > should be obvious. > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > You updated your beta2 with beta3. Now you can add beta2 again by > > > > > > emerge > > > > > > > > > =dev-db/posgresql-9.4-beta2 (or something like) > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:36 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > Well, after the emerge, no sign of beta2 anywhere, I have the > > > > > > directory > > > > > > > > > > /usr/lib64/postgresql-9.4/ with the beta3 binaries and that is > > > > > > all, is > > > > > > > > > > there a problem with the ebuilds or something? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > Well, emerge it again :). You can have two postgresql-servers > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > slots. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:21 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > However, when I emerge beta3, beta2 is gone, so this is my > > > > > > problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir Romanov wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Yes. You emerge both beta2 and beta3, then run pg_upgrade > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > beta3, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > provide BOTH binaries to it, it converts the base. Then > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > delete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > beta2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2014-11-10 16:04 GMT+05:00 : > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. I have a puzzle regarding upgrading postgresql. In > > > > > > > > > > > my > > > > > > > > > > recent > > > > > > > > > > > > > > world > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > update I went from 9.4_beta2 to beta3, but when I tried > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > start > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > server, it complained that the databases were written > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "catalog version" -- whatever that is, and the > > > > > > > > > > > pg_upgrade > > > > > > tool > > > > > > > > > > requires > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > both old and new binaries to actually upgrade the > > > > > > > > > > > database. > > > > > > > > > > So as > > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > temporary measure, I went back to beta2 and things > > > > > > > > > > > worked > > > > > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what the heck are you supposed to do here, I like pg, > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > very > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > strange to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. > > > > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > >
