Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Paul Tobias]

On 8 August 2015 at 20:11, Jonathan Callen  wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 08/08/2015 01:37 PM, James wrote:
> > James  tampabay.rr.com> writes:
> >
> >> there is *no we* in nix unless your or I step up. Fair enough!
> >> ::
> >
> >> git clone --bare https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.gitCloning
> >> into bare repository 'gli.git'... fatal: repository
> >> 'https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.git/' not found
> >
> >> It'd be wonderfully appreciated if somebody (anybody) has those
> >> old installer sources anywhere I can replicate them for
> >> tweaking.
> >>
> >
> > SVEN created a wonderful repositor of old portage snapshots::
> >
> >
> > http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/
> >
> > But, alas it has "disappeared" too?
> >
> > Granted the posted reason is a failure of guidexml:
> >
> > "Resource unavailable
> >
> > The requested resource uses Gentoo's retired web publication system
> > GuideXML. As support for GuideXML was disabled on May 18, 2015, the
> > resource can not be displayed. We hope the author provides an
> > updated version soon.  "
> >
> >
> > So there is no other way to publish archived portage tree
> > snapshots?
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > Gentoo devs should at least appreciate the frustration the
> > gentoo_commoners experience:: since it looks like the only
> > automated installer we're going to get on gentoo is DYI I'm ok
> > with that but the simplest path (IMHO) is to just start off where
> > the 2009 installer left off.
> >
> >
> > After all, all the brilliant minds say that it cannot be be or
> > should not be done (create and automated gentoo installer).
> >
> >
> > James
>
> Until Sven updates his code to not use GuideXML, I have linked to his
> snapshots in my own devspace, under
> .
>
> The snapshots go back to 2008-01-20, and are current to 2015-07-20.

That's useful, thanks!

To get back to the topic, it looks like the default won't change so I
added a file to /etc/portage/patches/:

# cat /etc/portage/patches/sys-apps/sysvinit/inittab-no-clear.patch
--- inittab.old 2015-08-12 17:01:15.816699692 +0200
+++ inittab 2015-08-12 17:05:18.768780431 +0200
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
 su1:S:wait:/sbin/sulogin

 # TERMINALS
-c1:12345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty1 linux
+c1:12345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty1 linux --noclear
 c2:2345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty2 linux
 c3:2345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty3 linux
 c4:2345:respawn:/sbin/agetty 38400 tty4 linux

And if you have systemd, you can do something like this:

# cat '/etc/systemd/system/getty@tty1.service.d/noclear.conf'
[Service]
TTYVTDisallocate=no

Re: [gentoo-user] LVM not accessible after reboot

[Marko Weber | 8000]

Hi Paul,
i added the rootdelay to kernelcmdline
and after reboot machine lvm was fine and all Partitions mounted. I will See If 
this works next reboots too.

Thanks for the tipp

Am 10. August 2015 22:52:57 MESZ, schrieb Paul Tobias :
>> my ideas is that LVM2 is not ready at the time of mounting
>partitions.
>how can i do this?
>
>I had the same problem on a system where scsi initialization was very
>slow.
>Adding "rootdelay=30" to the kernel command line fixed it. The "30" is
>how
>many seconds should the kernel wait before it starts mounting
>filesystems.
>
>There was an scsi-wait-scan module too, but I think that was removed
>from
>recent kernels.
>
>Maybe this is not the same problem you have, probably it's quite rare
>to
>have a slowly initializing disk subsystem.

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Virtualbox-5.0.0 [wow!]

[Jeremi Piotrowski]

On Sat, 18 Jul 2015, Fernando Rodriguez wrote:
> And it works fine with 4.2.0-rc2 for me. Did  you remember to re-emerge app-
> emulation/virtualbox-modules (after setting the /usr/src/linux symlink to the 
> new kernel source)?

So it seems I wasn't the only one with the problem on 4.2 (linux):

https://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=68883

It has been acknowledged and fixed and will be released in a future
version.

I'll have to wait until then for a second impression of Virtualbox 5.0.

Re: [gentoo-user] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[Gevisz]

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:47:30 -0400 Rich Freeman  wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:01 AM, gevisz  wrote:
> > Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
> > my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
> >  * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
> > if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
> > work in the future.
> >
> 
> https://infra-status.gentoo.org/notice/20150808-git
> 
> Update (2015-08-11)
> 
> Syncing issues are still being worked on.
> Some services depending on the package repository are also still
> pending to be adapted (packages.gentoo.org, snapshots).
> 
> (emerge-webrsync uses the snapshots I believe)
> 
> As far as I'm aware there are no current plans to make emerge-webrsync
> stop working.

Ok, thank you for the information.

Re: [gentoo-user] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[Gevisz]

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 11:25:09 +0300 Alon Bar-Lev  wrote:

> On 12 August 2015 at 11:20, gevisz  wrote:
> > 2015-08-12 11:10 GMT+03:00 Alon Bar-Lev :
> >> I am waiting as well... :)
> >>
> >> In the meantime, please do not use this script directly any more.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > What is the shotcomings of using that script directly?
> 
> I hope that in time it will be removed in favour of the new repo mechanism.
> 
> >
> >> Create:
> >> /etc/portage/repos.conf/gentoo.conf
> >
> > I do have such a file, but there stands:
> >
> > [DEFAULT]
> > main-repo = gentoo
> >
> > [gentoo]
> > location = /usr/portage
> > auto-sync = no
> > sync-type = rsync
> 
> modify this^ to webrsync

Yes, this part of the job is clear.
 
> > sync-uri = rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage
> 
> remove this^

But here, I am afraid that I should put something else instead,
not just delete the line.

> > Not exactly what I want. :)
> >
> >> ---
> >> [DEFAULT]
> >> main-repo = gentoo
> >>
> >> [gentoo]
> >> location = /usr/portage
> >> sync-type = webrsync
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Then use:
> >>
> >> # emerge --sync
> 
> and ^
> 
> >>
> >>
> >> On 12 August 2015 at 11:01, gevisz  wrote:
> >>> Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
> >>> my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
> >>>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
> >>> if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
> >>> work in the future.
> >>>
> >>> # emerge-webrsync
> >>> Fetching most recent snapshot ...
> >>> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from 
> >>> http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> >>> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> >>> 20150811 snapshot was not found
> >>> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from 
> >>> http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> >>> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> >>> 20150810 snapshot was not found
> >>> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from 
> >>> http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> >>> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> >>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> >>> 20150809 snapshot was not found
> >>>  * Latest snapshot date: 20150808
> >>>  *
> >>>  * Approximate snapshot timestamp: 1439081100
> >>>  *Current local timestamp: 1439080501
> >>>  *
> >>>  * The current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
> >>>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot. In order to force sync, use
> >>>  * the --revert option or remove the timestamp file located at
> >>>  * '/usr/portage/metadata/timestamp.x'.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> 

Re: [gentoo-user] LVM not accessible after reboot

[Steven Lembark]

On Mon, 10 Aug 2015 13:06:55 +0200
Marko Weber | 8000  wrote:

Are the partitions typed as raid auto-detect (fd)?
Or are you expecting an initrd to assemble the RAID from config data?
May be an issue with timing in the initrd if the latter.

Also try making sure that all of the components required to access the 
boot volume are compiled into the kernel (e.g., drivers, RAID, LVM, 
filesystem). This avoids dependency & timing issues pulling in the
modules.

Might be worth using unetbootin to put a minimal install image onto a
thumb drive and see whether the kernel is reliably building the RAID
for you. If booting the install consistently shows your RAID built at
boot time then the problem is either in your kernel configs or LVM. If
nothing else, having the thumb around makes dealing with hardware 
failures a helluva lot easier.

-- 
Steven Lembark 3646 Flora Pl
Workhorse Computing   St Louis, MO 63110
lemb...@wrkhors.com  +1 888 359 3508

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: testing system + gcc-5.2 anyone?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 12/08/2015 12:59, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 05:18:54 -0400, covici wrote:
>>
>>> Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
>>>
 On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:01:50 +0200, Helmut Jarausch wrote:

> On 08/10/2015 05:29:04 PM, James wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just for grins, I'm thinking about installing a gentoo system that
>> is (~) testing and newer codes and setting gcc-.5.2 as the default
>> compiler. Anyone doing this yet? Will it mostly work or should I
>> wait? Workstation with lxqt-0.9x.
>
> I don't use lxqt here, but ...
> I'm using gcc-5.2.0 very successfully here. I am not aware of a
> single package which doesn't compile with this version.
> And the kernel itself compiles just fine (currentlich running
> 4.2.0-rc6 compiled with gcc-5.2.0)

 +1

 I just updated all my ~amd64 multilib systems to 5.2 and everything
 still works without a hitch, including acroread & skype. 4.9.3 is gone.
 :)

> One caveat though when upgrading a system which has been built with
> gcc-x for x < 5.
> The (pure) C++ libraries aren't compatible with older versions so
> that all packages which link to libstdc++ or libsupc++ have to be
> rebuilt. Packages which just use C aren't effected at all.

 Interestingly I didn't have to rebuild anything (yet), which I find
 surprising given the changes in the ABI and std::string. I expected at
 least a few problems,
 but so far - nothing.
>>>
>>> I can't even emerge gcc-5.2.0 because of missing keyword, as of a sync
>>> of yesterday, so what is happening with that?
>>
>> The ebuild currently doesn't have any keywords, so enable them:
>>
>> $grep gcc /etc/portage/profile/package.accept_keywords
>>> =sys-devel/gcc-5.2.0 ** (or your specific arch instead of **)
> 
> But why do they have no keywords?  Does this mean the package is not
> ready for prime time or much else?
> 


It's normal for new bleeding-edge versions to be in the tree without
keywords. It means the code compiled and seems to do something useful
for at least one person (the dev) but cannot be guaranteed to work yet
on any arch. Hence no keywords = will not install on any arch without
user intervention



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: testing system + gcc-5.2 anyone?

[covici]

Holger Hoffstätte wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 05:18:54 -0400, covici wrote:
> 
> > Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> > 
> >> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:01:50 +0200, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On 08/10/2015 05:29:04 PM, James wrote:
> >> >> Hello,
> >> >> 
> >> >> Just for grins, I'm thinking about installing a gentoo system that
> >> >> is (~) testing and newer codes and setting gcc-.5.2 as the default
> >> >> compiler. Anyone doing this yet? Will it mostly work or should I
> >> >> wait? Workstation with lxqt-0.9x.
> >> > 
> >> > I don't use lxqt here, but ...
> >> > I'm using gcc-5.2.0 very successfully here. I am not aware of a
> >> > single package which doesn't compile with this version.
> >> > And the kernel itself compiles just fine (currentlich running
> >> > 4.2.0-rc6 compiled with gcc-5.2.0)
> >> 
> >> +1
> >> 
> >> I just updated all my ~amd64 multilib systems to 5.2 and everything
> >> still works without a hitch, including acroread & skype. 4.9.3 is gone.
> >> :)
> >> 
> >> > One caveat though when upgrading a system which has been built with
> >> > gcc-x for x < 5.
> >> > The (pure) C++ libraries aren't compatible with older versions so
> >> > that all packages which link to libstdc++ or libsupc++ have to be
> >> > rebuilt. Packages which just use C aren't effected at all.
> >> 
> >> Interestingly I didn't have to rebuild anything (yet), which I find
> >> surprising given the changes in the ABI and std::string. I expected at
> >> least a few problems,
> >> but so far - nothing.
> > 
> > I can't even emerge gcc-5.2.0 because of missing keyword, as of a sync
> > of yesterday, so what is happening with that?
> 
> The ebuild currently doesn't have any keywords, so enable them:
> 
> $grep gcc /etc/portage/profile/package.accept_keywords
> >=sys-devel/gcc-5.2.0 ** (or your specific arch instead of **)

But why do they have no keywords?  Does this mean the package is not
ready for prime time or much else?

-- 
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] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:01 AM, gevisz  wrote:
> Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
> my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
> if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
> work in the future.
>

https://infra-status.gentoo.org/notice/20150808-git

Update (2015-08-11)

Syncing issues are still being worked on.
Some services depending on the package repository are also still
pending to be adapted (packages.gentoo.org, snapshots).

(emerge-webrsync uses the snapshots I believe)

As far as I'm aware there are no current plans to make emerge-webrsync
stop working.

-- 
Rich

[gentoo-user] Re: testing system + gcc-5.2 anyone?

[Holger Hoffstätte]

On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 05:18:54 -0400, covici wrote:

> Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:01:50 +0200, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
>> 
>> > On 08/10/2015 05:29:04 PM, James wrote:
>> >> Hello,
>> >> 
>> >> Just for grins, I'm thinking about installing a gentoo system that
>> >> is (~) testing and newer codes and setting gcc-.5.2 as the default
>> >> compiler. Anyone doing this yet? Will it mostly work or should I
>> >> wait? Workstation with lxqt-0.9x.
>> > 
>> > I don't use lxqt here, but ...
>> > I'm using gcc-5.2.0 very successfully here. I am not aware of a
>> > single package which doesn't compile with this version.
>> > And the kernel itself compiles just fine (currentlich running
>> > 4.2.0-rc6 compiled with gcc-5.2.0)
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> I just updated all my ~amd64 multilib systems to 5.2 and everything
>> still works without a hitch, including acroread & skype. 4.9.3 is gone.
>> :)
>> 
>> > One caveat though when upgrading a system which has been built with
>> > gcc-x for x < 5.
>> > The (pure) C++ libraries aren't compatible with older versions so
>> > that all packages which link to libstdc++ or libsupc++ have to be
>> > rebuilt. Packages which just use C aren't effected at all.
>> 
>> Interestingly I didn't have to rebuild anything (yet), which I find
>> surprising given the changes in the ABI and std::string. I expected at
>> least a few problems,
>> but so far - nothing.
> 
> I can't even emerge gcc-5.2.0 because of missing keyword, as of a sync
> of yesterday, so what is happening with that?

The ebuild currently doesn't have any keywords, so enable them:

$grep gcc /etc/portage/profile/package.accept_keywords
>=sys-devel/gcc-5.2.0 ** (or your specific arch instead of **)

Enjoy. :)

-h

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: testing system + gcc-5.2 anyone?

[covici]

Holger Hoffstätte wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:01:50 +0200, Helmut Jarausch wrote:
> 
> > On 08/10/2015 05:29:04 PM, James wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >> 
> >> Just for grins, I'm thinking about installing a gentoo system
> >> that is (~) testing and newer codes and setting gcc-.5.2 as the
> >> default compiler. Anyone doing this yet? Will it mostly work
> >> or should I wait? Workstation with lxqt-0.9x.
> > 
> > I don't use lxqt here, but ...
> > I'm using gcc-5.2.0 very successfully here. I am not aware of a single 
> > package which doesn't compile with this version.
> > And the kernel itself compiles just fine (currentlich running 4.2.0-rc6 
> > compiled with gcc-5.2.0)
> 
> +1
> 
> I just updated all my ~amd64 multilib systems to 5.2 and everything still 
> works
> without a hitch, including acroread & skype. 4.9.3 is gone. :)
> 
> > One caveat though when upgrading a system which has been built with gcc-x 
> > for x < 5.
> > The (pure) C++ libraries aren't compatible with older versions so that all 
> > packages which link to
> > libstdc++ or libsupc++ have to be rebuilt. Packages which just use C aren't 
> > effected at all.
> 
> Interestingly I didn't have to rebuild anything (yet), which I find surprising
> given the changes in the ABI and std::string. I expected at least a few 
> problems,
> but so far - nothing.

I can't even emerge gcc-5.2.0 because of missing keyword, as of a sync
of yesterday, so what is happening with that?

-- 
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] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[Alon Bar-Lev]

On 12 August 2015 at 11:20, gevisz  wrote:
> 2015-08-12 11:10 GMT+03:00 Alon Bar-Lev :
>> I am waiting as well... :)
>>
>> In the meantime, please do not use this script directly any more.
>
> Why?
>
> What is the shotcomings of using that script directly?

I hope that in time it will be removed in favour of the new repo mechanism.

>
>> Create:
>> /etc/portage/repos.conf/gentoo.conf
>
> I do have such a file, but there stands:
>
> [DEFAULT]
> main-repo = gentoo
>
> [gentoo]
> location = /usr/portage
> auto-sync = no
> sync-type = rsync

modify this^ to webrsync

> sync-uri = rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage

remove this^

>
> Not exactly what I want. :)
>
>> ---
>> [DEFAULT]
>> main-repo = gentoo
>>
>> [gentoo]
>> location = /usr/portage
>> sync-type = webrsync
>> ---
>>
>> Then use:
>>
>> # emerge --sync

and ^

>>
>>
>> On 12 August 2015 at 11:01, gevisz  wrote:
>>> Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
>>> my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>>>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
>>> if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
>>> work in the future.
>>>
>>> # emerge-webrsync
>>> Fetching most recent snapshot ...
>>> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from 
>>> http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>>> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>>> 20150811 snapshot was not found
>>> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from 
>>> http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>>> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>>> 20150810 snapshot was not found
>>> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from 
>>> http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>>> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>>> 20150809 snapshot was not found
>>>  * Latest snapshot date: 20150808
>>>  *
>>>  * Approximate snapshot timestamp: 1439081100
>>>  *Current local timestamp: 1439080501
>>>  *
>>>  * The current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>>>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot. In order to force sync, use
>>>  * the --revert option or remove the timestamp file located at
>>>  * '/usr/portage/metadata/timestamp.x'.
>>>
>>
>

Re: [gentoo-user] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[gevisz]

2015-08-12 11:10 GMT+03:00 Alon Bar-Lev :
> I am waiting as well... :)
>
> In the meantime, please do not use this script directly any more.

Why?

What is the shotcomings of using that script directly?

> Create:
> /etc/portage/repos.conf/gentoo.conf

I do have such a file, but there stands:

[DEFAULT]
main-repo = gentoo

[gentoo]
location = /usr/portage
auto-sync = no
sync-type = rsync
sync-uri = rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage

Not exactly what I want. :)

> ---
> [DEFAULT]
> main-repo = gentoo
>
> [gentoo]
> location = /usr/portage
> sync-type = webrsync
> ---
>
> Then use:
>
> # emerge --sync
>
>
> On 12 August 2015 at 11:01, gevisz  wrote:
>> Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
>> my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
>> if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
>> work in the future.
>>
>> # emerge-webrsync
>> Fetching most recent snapshot ...
>> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo 
>> ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>> 20150811 snapshot was not found
>> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo 
>> ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>> 20150810 snapshot was not found
>> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo 
>> ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
>> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
>> 20150809 snapshot was not found
>>  * Latest snapshot date: 20150808
>>  *
>>  * Approximate snapshot timestamp: 1439081100
>>  *Current local timestamp: 1439080501
>>  *
>>  * The current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot. In order to force sync, use
>>  * the --revert option or remove the timestamp file located at
>>  * '/usr/portage/metadata/timestamp.x'.
>>
>

Re: [gentoo-user] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[Alon Bar-Lev]

I am waiting as well... :)

In the meantime, please do not use this script directly any more.

Create:
/etc/portage/repos.conf/gentoo.conf
---
[DEFAULT]
main-repo = gentoo

[gentoo]
location = /usr/portage
sync-type = webrsync
---

Then use:

# emerge --sync


On 12 August 2015 at 11:01, gevisz  wrote:
> Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
> my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
> if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
> work in the future.
>
> # emerge-webrsync
> Fetching most recent snapshot ...
> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo 
> ...
> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> 20150811 snapshot was not found
> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo 
> ...
> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> 20150810 snapshot was not found
> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo 
> ...
> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
> Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
> 20150809 snapshot was not found
>  * Latest snapshot date: 20150808
>  *
>  * Approximate snapshot timestamp: 1439081100
>  *Current local timestamp: 1439080501
>  *
>  * The current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
>  * timestamp of the latest snapshot. In order to force sync, use
>  * the --revert option or remove the timestamp file located at
>  * '/usr/portage/metadata/timestamp.x'.
>

[gentoo-user] Will emerge-webrsyc work in the future?

[gevisz]

Already for the third day, emerge-webrsyc says me that
my "current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
 * timestamp of the latest snapshot," so I began to worry
if this way of syncing my portage tree still works and will
work in the future.

# emerge-webrsync
Fetching most recent snapshot ...
Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
Trying to retrieve 20150811 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.xz.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150811.tar.gz.md5sum ...
20150811 snapshot was not found
Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
Trying to retrieve 20150810 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.xz.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150810.tar.gz.md5sum ...
20150810 snapshot was not found
Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://mirror.netcologne.de/gentoo ...
Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
Trying to retrieve 20150809 snapshot from http://de-mirror.org/gentoo ...
Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.xz.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.bz2.md5sum ...
Fetching file portage-20150809.tar.gz.md5sum ...
20150809 snapshot was not found
 * Latest snapshot date: 20150808
 *
 * Approximate snapshot timestamp: 1439081100
 *Current local timestamp: 1439080501
 *
 * The current local timestamp is possibly identical to the
 * timestamp of the latest snapshot. In order to force sync, use
 * the --revert option or remove the timestamp file located at
 * '/usr/portage/metadata/timestamp.x'.

[gentoo-user] Re: testing system + gcc-5.2 anyone?

[Holger Hoffstätte]

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 12:01:50 +0200, Helmut Jarausch wrote:

> On 08/10/2015 05:29:04 PM, James wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Just for grins, I'm thinking about installing a gentoo system
>> that is (~) testing and newer codes and setting gcc-.5.2 as the
>> default compiler. Anyone doing this yet? Will it mostly work
>> or should I wait? Workstation with lxqt-0.9x.
> 
> I don't use lxqt here, but ...
> I'm using gcc-5.2.0 very successfully here. I am not aware of a single 
> package which doesn't compile with this version.
> And the kernel itself compiles just fine (currentlich running 4.2.0-rc6 
> compiled with gcc-5.2.0)

+1

I just updated all my ~amd64 multilib systems to 5.2 and everything still works
without a hitch, including acroread & skype. 4.9.3 is gone. :)

> One caveat though when upgrading a system which has been built with gcc-x for 
> x < 5.
> The (pure) C++ libraries aren't compatible with older versions so that all 
> packages which link to
> libstdc++ or libsupc++ have to be rebuilt. Packages which just use C aren't 
> effected at all.

Interestingly I didn't have to rebuild anything (yet), which I find surprising
given the changes in the ABI and std::string. I expected at least a few 
problems,
but so far - nothing.

-h