Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade can't run fix_libtool_files
On 06/16/2014 09:56 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: Does someone know what causes the error? I got this when upgrading from GCC 4.8.2 to 4.8.3: Installing (1 of 1) sys-devel/gcc-4.8.3 * gcc-config: Could not locate 'x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.8.2' in '/etc/env.d/gcc/' ! * Running 'fix_libtool_files.sh 4.8.2' * Scanning libtool files for hardcoded gcc library paths... * gcc-config: Active gcc profile is invalid! gcc-config: error: could not run/locate 'gcc' :0: assertion failed: (gcc -dumpversion) | getline NEWVER) It looks like you've upgraded gcc and removed the version that was currently active. What's the output of `gcc-config -l`? It should look something like this: $ sudo gcc-config -l [1] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.7.3 * The asterisk means it's active. If you see a list and none are active, you need to set one. Dan
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade 4.6.3 to 4.7.3 - any gotchas?
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 12:29:27PM -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: Just asking ahead of time... Any major gotchas with respect to this GCC upgrade? Does this one introduce any ABI changes that require rebuilding the entire toolchain... or even world? It's an easy upgrade. Just remember to gcc-config -l and gcc-config 1 or whatever number you need active after the upgrade, then . /etc/profile and some people have needed to re-emerge libtool (emerge -1 libtool). No need to rebuild the entire toolchain on this one. -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
If you want gcc's minor versions in their own slots, then you want the mutislot use flag: :; euses multislot sys-devel/gcc:multislot - Allow for SLOTs to include minor version (3.3.4 instead of just 3.3) -JimC -- James Cloos cl...@jhcloos.com OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 07:24:44 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? Since always if both versions are in the same slot, which is what I would expect for a simple upgrade. A major version step would be in a different slot (4.5, 4.6 etc) and would be installed alongside your old version (until you depclean). -- Neil Bothwick One difference between a man and a machine is that a machine is quiet when well oiled. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: This has never happened to me before... Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? I have *always* kept my prior GCC around for a while, if not until the next upgrade, just as something to fall back on if the current one breaks. I am NOT a happy camper. This always happens if the gcc your are upgrading to is in the same slot as the previous one. It is like a normal package upgrade. You can't keep both gccs in the same slot. gcc preserves installations only if they are on different slots. And please write proper subject on emails. WTF is not really appropriate for a mailing list. Regards, Markos
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On 2012-09-07 7:44 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: This has never happened to me before... Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? I have *always* kept my prior GCC around for a while, if not until the next upgrade, just as something to fall back on if the current one breaks. I am NOT a happy camper. This always happens if the gcc your are upgrading to is in the same slot as the previous one. Well, I've been managing this gentoo server since I installed it over 8 years ago, and I don't *ever* recall a GCC upgrade removing my prior version. And please write proper subject on emails. WTF is not really appropriate for a mailing list. Don't be stupid. I see that all the time... if you don't like it just ignore it.
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2012-09-07 7:44 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: This has never happened to me before... Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? I have *always* kept my prior GCC around for a while, if not until the next upgrade, just as something to fall back on if the current one breaks. I am NOT a happy camper. This always happens if the gcc your are upgrading to is in the same slot as the previous one. Well, I've been managing this gentoo server since I installed it over 8 years ago, and I don't *ever* recall a GCC upgrade removing my prior version. FWIW, My boxes for the last two years have always removed patch versions. Depcleans remove old minor versions, if nothing depends on them. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2012-09-07 7:44 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: This has never happened to me before... Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? I have *always* kept my prior GCC around for a while, if not until the next upgrade, just as something to fall back on if the current one breaks. I am NOT a happy camper. This always happens if the gcc your are upgrading to is in the same slot as the previous one. Well, I've been managing this gentoo server since I installed it over 8 years ago, and I don't *ever* recall a GCC upgrade removing my prior version. All of us told you that you are wrong. Since you insist that Gentoo always keep multiple gcc versions of the same slot around, then ok , I guess you know better.
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2012-09-07 7:44 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: This has never happened to me before... Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? I have *always* kept my prior GCC around for a while, if not until the next upgrade, just as something to fall back on if the current one breaks. I am NOT a happy camper. This always happens if the gcc your are upgrading to is in the same slot as the previous one. Well, I've been managing this gentoo server since I installed it over 8 years ago, and I don't *ever* recall a GCC upgrade removing my prior version. And please write proper subject on emails. WTF is not really appropriate for a mailing list. Don't be stupid. I see that all the time... if you don't like it just ignore it. And calling someone who is trying to help you stupid is not very mature. You are on your own
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On 2012-09-07 9:12 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: Well, I've been managing this gentoo server since I installed it over 8 years ago, and I don't *ever* recall a GCC upgrade removing my prior version. All of us told you that you are wrong. Since you insist that Gentoo always keep multiple gcc versions of the same slot around, then ok , I guess you know better. I'm simply saying that I have always been very careful with GCC upgrades (among a few others), and I have always kept the prior version around, using gcc-select to switch to the new version after the upgrade. I guess the only explanation if what you guys are saying is correct is that I've never done a minor upgrade for the version in the current slot... Weird...
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On 2012-09-07 9:22 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: Don't be stupid. I see that all the time... if you don't like it just ignore it. And calling someone who is trying to help you stupid is not very mature. You are on your own Sorry... I should have said 'That is stupid'... I didn't mean that *you* were stupid, I meant that what you said was stupid, and it was... I see people use wtf on lists all the time, so saying I shouldn't use it is - well, stupid...
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2012-09-07 9:22 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: Don't be stupid. I see that all the time... if you don't like it just ignore it. And calling someone who is trying to help you stupid is not very mature. You are on your own Sorry... I should have said 'That is stupid'... I didn't mean that *you* were stupid, I meant that what you said was stupid, and it was... I see people use wtf on lists all the time, so saying I shouldn't use it is - well, stupid... Every mailing list is like its own group of friends and acquaintances, and has its own social rules. Just because some lists uses phrases like WTF doesn't mean it fits into the cultures of the rest. Not that _I_ care, but obviously others do, and so I filter myself accordingly. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:
I guess the only explanation if what you guys are saying is correct is that
I've never done a minor upgrade for the version in the current slot...
Basically any slotted package works this way. Upgrades within the same
slot replace the previous version within the same slot. You can only
have one version installed in each slot at any given time.
Using eix we can see the versions currently in portage (as of my last
sync) for each slot:
[I] sys-devel/gcc
Available versions:
(2.95) *2.95.3-r9 ~*2.95.3-r10^s
(3.1) *3.1.1-r2
(3.2) **3.2.2^s *3.2.3-r4
(3.3) (~)3.3.6-r1^s
(3.4) 3.4.6-r2^s
(4.0) ~*4.0.4^s
(4.1) 4.1.2^s
(4.2) (~)4.2.4-r1^s
(4.3) (~)4.3.3-r2^s{tbz2} 4.3.4^s{tbz2} (~)4.3.5^s 4.3.6-r1^s
(4.4) (~)4.4.2^s{tbz2} (~)4.4.3-r3^s 4.4.4-r2^s{tbz2}
4.4.5^s{tbz2} 4.4.6-r1^s 4.4.7^s
(4.5) (~)4.5.1-r1^s{tbz2} (~)4.5.2^s{tbz2} 4.5.3-r2^s{tbz2} 4.5.4^s
(4.6) (~)4.6.0^s (~)4.6.1-r1^s (~)4.6.2^s (~)4.6.3^s{tbz2}
(4.7) [M]**4.7.0^s [M]**4.7.1^s
So, for example, you can see the 4.5 slot contains 4.5.1, 4.5.2,
4.5.3, 4.5.4. You can only have one of those installed at any given
time.
Off the top of my head, the only packages that routinely have slots
for every patch release are kernel packages.
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
Am 07.09.2012 14:53, schrieb Tanstaafl: On 2012-09-07 7:44 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote: On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Tanstaafltansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: This has never happened to me before... Since when did a simple GCC upgrade *automatically* REMOVE my prior GCC install??? I have *always* kept my prior GCC around for a while, if not until the next upgrade, just as something to fall back on if the current one breaks. I am NOT a happy camper. This always happens if the gcc your are upgrading to is in the same slot as the previous one. Well, I've been managing this gentoo server since I installed it over 8 years ago, and I don't *ever* recall a GCC upgrade removing my prior version. Well, then this simple little command should help you refresh your memory. It shows every install and uninstall of gcc on your system. With 8 years of emerge.log you are good to go genlop -ul | grep 'sys-devel/gcc-[0-9]'
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:26:40 +0200, Michael Hampicke wrote: Well, then this simple little command should help you refresh your memory. It shows every install and uninstall of gcc on your system. With 8 years of emerge.log you are good to go genlop -ul | grep 'sys-devel/gcc-[0-9]' And this week's prize for unnecessary use of pipes and grep goes to... genlop -u sys-devel/gcc :P -- Neil Bothwick BING But It's Not Google signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
Am 07.09.2012 21:52, schrieb Neil Bothwick: On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:26:40 +0200, Michael Hampicke wrote: Well, then this simple little command should help you refresh your memory. It shows every install and uninstall of gcc on your system. With 8 years of emerge.log you are good to go genlop -ul | grep 'sys-devel/gcc-[0-9]' And this week's prize for unnecessary use of pipes and grep goes to... genlop -u sys-devel/gcc :P Nope, we not only need the time when gcc was unmerged (-u), but also when it was merged (-l). When there's little time difference between merge and unmerge we can assume, that portage auto-cleaned the old version of gcc. If you combine -u and -l you need to grep (to be exact sys-devel/gcc-[0-9], because of sys-devel/gcc-config and sys-devel/gcc-apple). Yeehaw cowboy :) :)
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 23:14:05 +0200, Michael Hampicke wrote: genlop -ul | grep 'sys-devel/gcc-[0-9]' And this week's prize for unnecessary use of pipes and grep goes to... genlop -u sys-devel/gcc Nope, we not only need the time when gcc was unmerged (-u), but also when it was merged (-l). When there's little time difference between merge and unmerge we can assume, that portage auto-cleaned the old version of gcc. If you combine -u and -l you need to grep (to be exact sys-devel/gcc-[0-9], because of sys-devel/gcc-config and sys-devel/gcc-apple). genlop, unlike qlop, does exact matching by default, so gcc mtches only gcc, not gcc-config (use -s if you want that). When you give a package name all merges are shown by default (-l is to show the full history), so the command I gave does what you want, like this Thu Jun 21 01:45:05 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2 Thu Jun 21 01:45:33 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2 Mon Jul 16 10:30:01 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2 Mon Jul 16 10:30:32 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 Thu Sep 6 11:24:27 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3 Thu Sep 6 11:24:45 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3 Thu Sep 6 11:26:15 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 Thu Sep 6 11:26:43 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 Except it is coloured by default when outputting to a terminal, merges in green, unmerges in red. Using -l and then grep is saying show me everything, oh no, cut out anything that's not gcc rather than show me all gcc merges and unmerges. -- Neil Bothwick There's no place like http://www.home.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade from 4.5.3 to 4.5.4 automatically removes 4.5.3???? Wtf???
2012/9/8 Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 23:14:05 +0200, Michael Hampicke wrote: genlop -ul | grep 'sys-devel/gcc-[0-9]' And this week's prize for unnecessary use of pipes and grep goes to... genlop -u sys-devel/gcc Nope, we not only need the time when gcc was unmerged (-u), but also when it was merged (-l). When there's little time difference between merge and unmerge we can assume, that portage auto-cleaned the old version of gcc. If you combine -u and -l you need to grep (to be exact sys-devel/gcc-[0-9], because of sys-devel/gcc-config and sys-devel/gcc-apple). genlop, unlike qlop, does exact matching by default, so gcc mtches only gcc, not gcc-config (use -s if you want that). When you give a package name all merges are shown by default (-l is to show the full history), so the command I gave does what you want, like this Thu Jun 21 01:45:05 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2 Thu Jun 21 01:45:33 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2 Mon Jul 16 10:30:01 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2 Mon Jul 16 10:30:32 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 Thu Sep 6 11:24:27 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3 Thu Sep 6 11:24:45 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.6.3 Thu Sep 6 11:26:15 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 Thu Sep 6 11:26:43 2012 sys-devel/gcc-4.5.4 Except it is coloured by default when outputting to a terminal, merges in green, unmerges in red. Using -l and then grep is saying show me everything, oh no, cut out anything that's not gcc rather than show me all gcc merges and unmerges. I tried your command before answering you - so I don't look like a fool :) And I am 100% certain that genlop -u package only showed unmerges when I tested it on my workstation (that's the reason I added -l | grep). However, just now I tested it again on my notebook, and it works like you described it (and like how you would expect it to work). Have to try it again on my WS on monday. Anyhoo, my point was to show the OP how he could check for himself that portage always unmerges older packages when upgrading to newer versions in the same slot - and for that, both solutions work. Going to bed now
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade - rebuild everything?
I just upgraded from gcc-4.4.3-r2 to gcc-4.4.4-r2 and I'm wondering if I really need to rebuild everything as it says in the guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml No, you do not need to do this. The document is over-reaching (see below) I ran a mixture of 4.4.3 and 4.4.4 for ages, completely trouble-free. If not, when is it necessary? When you have an ABI change in the code generated by the compiler. In other words, when code generated by this version is incompatible with code generated by that version, and you have both on the same system. This has not happened for a long time in gcc-land. Now, about that official doc. Your question comes up with unbelievable regularity and every time the poster references that doc. But it is not necessary to do what the doc says, and a long time ago I think I figured it out. The author's intention is less to give you the absolute complete total 100% truth that will always work out just fine, and more to reduce the amount of clutter in his inbox or on b.g.o. The rules about how to detect when a rebuild of world is needed are complex and most readers simply will not understand them - they don't understand compiler internals (how many people DO?). But if you tell people to just rebuild world every time, and weird funny lurking problems are likely to just get fixed as a side effect, no real harm is done. Does it hurt the author? No. Does it reduce the amount of bugs he has to deal with on the rare occasion it is needed? Yes. What does the user lose? Nothing much, more cpu cycles get used, more bits flip on a disk, your video card gets a work out scrolling all that text. Will you waste time? Yes. Will you break stuff? No. So rebuild world if it makes you feel better. But you don't need to this time. The authors of gcc will certainly notify the entire world and it's dogs when you do need to. Thank you everyone. I won't rebuild. - Grant
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
On 19. 10. 2010 22:07, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:57:18 +0200, Jarry wrote: Especially when I have to repeat it with my 12 gentoo servers. Sequentially, unfortunatally, as they share the same hardware... Why not use --buildpkg the first time and --usepkg the other 11 times? They have slightly different use-flags. But I do not know if some of them might have impact on gcc too... Jarry -- ___ This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
Jarry wrote: On 19. 10. 2010 22:07, Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:57:18 +0200, Jarry wrote: Especially when I have to repeat it with my 12 gentoo servers. Sequentially, unfortunatally, as they share the same hardware... Why not use --buildpkg the first time and --usepkg the other 11 times? They have slightly different use-flags. But I do not know if some of them might have impact on gcc too... Jarry Just do a emerge -pv gcc and see if the USE flag is listed there. If it is, then this may not work. If it is not, you should be able to use the --buildpkg feature. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade - rebuild everything?
Grant wrote: I just upgraded from gcc-4.4.3-r2 to gcc-4.4.4-r2 and I'm wondering if I really need to rebuild everything as it says in the guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml If not, when is it necessary? - Grant I haven't seen any gurus recommend doing a emerge -e world in a while. I think that is for major changes in gcc. The upgrade you have just done seems to be a minor one. Me, if I was concerned about it at all, I would just do a emerge -e system. That way you know at least the packages needed for booting is rebuilt. If I have doubt, that is what I do and it doesn't take to long. If you have problems with your GUI or have problems with programs, then you can do a emerge -e world then. Also, if you are going to do this, there is a script that does it better than portage. It emerges things in a different order so that it only has to be done once instead of twice. I can find you a link to it if you are interested. I used it a month or so ago and it worked fine. It's been around for years. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade - rebuild everything?
Grant writes: I just upgraded from gcc-4.4.3-r2 to gcc-4.4.4-r2 and I'm wondering if I really need to rebuild everything as it says in the guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml The guide seems to be wrong here. Rebuilding does not harm, and it makes use of tall the cool new compiler optimizations, but normally it is not necessary. If not, when is it necessary? Only when the API changes, which happened the last time when gcc went from 3.3 to 3.4, I think. Wonko
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade - rebuild everything?
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Grant emailgr...@gmail.com wrote: I just upgraded from gcc-4.4.3-r2 to gcc-4.4.4-r2 and I'm wondering if I really need to rebuild everything as it says in the guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml If not, when is it necessary? As that guide says: Generally speaking, upgrades to bug fix releases, like from 3.3.5 to 3.3.6, should be quite safe -- just emerge new version, switch your system to use it and rebuild the only affected package, libtool. The General Upgrade Instructions are more for major version changes. I don't think 4.4.3 to 4.4.4 is considered an upgrade in this sense, just a minor update. I think even on larger upgrade, like 4.3 to 4.4, it's only necessary to rebuild everything if libstdc++.so's major version number has changed. @preserved-rebuild will hopefully give some assistance in that case anyway (if you're using a version of portage that has it).
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade - rebuild everything?
Apparently, though unproven, at 21:58 on Thursday 21 October 2010, Grant did opine thusly: I just upgraded from gcc-4.4.3-r2 to gcc-4.4.4-r2 and I'm wondering if I really need to rebuild everything as it says in the guide: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml No, you do not need to do this. The document is over-reaching (see below) I ran a mixture of 4.4.3 and 4.4.4 for ages, completely trouble-free. If not, when is it necessary? When you have an ABI change in the code generated by the compiler. In other words, when code generated by this version is incompatible with code generated by that version, and you have both on the same system. This has not happened for a long time in gcc-land. Now, about that official doc. Your question comes up with unbelievable regularity and every time the poster references that doc. But it is not necessary to do what the doc says, and a long time ago I think I figured it out. The author's intention is less to give you the absolute complete total 100% truth that will always work out just fine, and more to reduce the amount of clutter in his inbox or on b.g.o. The rules about how to detect when a rebuild of world is needed are complex and most readers simply will not understand them - they don't understand compiler internals (how many people DO?). But if you tell people to just rebuild world every time, and weird funny lurking problems are likely to just get fixed as a side effect, no real harm is done. Does it hurt the author? No. Does it reduce the amount of bugs he has to deal with on the rare occasion it is needed? Yes. What does the user lose? Nothing much, more cpu cycles get used, more bits flip on a disk, your video card gets a work out scrolling all that text. Will you waste time? Yes. Will you break stuff? No. So rebuild world if it makes you feel better. But you don't need to this time. The authors of gcc will certainly notify the entire world and it's dogs when you do need to. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
+1 2010/10/20 Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:57:18 +0200, Jarry wrote: I just think it is somehow time-consuming, emerging gcc two times. Especially when I have to repeat it with my 12 gentoo servers. Sequentially, unfortunatally, as they share the same hardware... Why not use --buildpkg the first time and --usepkg the other 11 times? -- Neil Bothwick deja vous - the act of forgetting someone's name /again/ despite being introduced to them several times. -- Jian Li
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 07:45:58PM +0200, Jarry wrote: Hi, I just tried to upgrade gcc (stable amd64, from 4.4.3-r2 to 4.4.4-r2) following the procedure recommended in Gentoo GCC Upgrade Guide: emerge -uav gcc At the end of compilation, I got these strange messages: * gcc-config: Could not locate 'x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3' in '/etc/env.d/gcc/' ! snip * Please re-emerge gcc. * http://bugs.gentoo.org/68395 snip That should do it :) -- Zeerak Waseem
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
On 2010-10-19 1:45 PM, Jarry wrote: Hi, I just tried to upgrade gcc (stable amd64, from 4.4.3-r2 to 4.4.4-r2) following the procedure recommended in Gentoo GCC Upgrade Guide: ? Current stable gcc is 4.4.3-r2 on amd64?
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
On 19. 10. 2010 20:02, Zeerak Mustafa Waseem wrote: On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 07:45:58PM +0200, Jarry wrote: I just tried to upgrade gcc (stable amd64, from 4.4.3-r2 to 4.4.4-r2) following the procedure recommended in Gentoo GCC Upgrade Guide: emerge -uav gcc At the end of compilation, I got these strange messages: * gcc-config: Could not locate 'x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3' in '/etc/env.d/gcc/' ! snip * Please re-emerge gcc. * http://bugs.gentoo.org/68395 snip That should do it :) Thanks, emerge --oneshot gcc really seems to have fixed it. I just think it is somehow time-consuming, emerging gcc two times. Especially when I have to repeat it with my 12 gentoo servers. Sequentially, unfortunatally, as they share the same hardware... Jarry -- ___ This mailbox accepts e-mails only from selected mailing-lists! Everything else is considered to be spam and therefore deleted.
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
On 19/10/2010 19:45, Jarry wrote: Hi, I just tried to upgrade gcc (stable amd64, from 4.4.3-r2 to 4.4.4-r2) following the procedure recommended in Gentoo GCC Upgrade Guide: emerge -uav gcc At the end of compilation, I got these strange messages: in '/etc/env.d/gcc/' ! * Running 'fix_libtool_files.sh 4.4.3' * Scanning libtool files for hardcoded gcc library paths... cat: ld.so.conf.d/*.conf: No such file or directory :0: assertion failed: (gcc -dumpversion) | getline NEWVER) Original instance of package unmerged safely. * Switching native-compiler to x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.4 ... * gcc-config: Active gcc profile is invalid! * Your gcc has a bug with GCC_SPECS. * Please re-emerge gcc. * http://bugs.gentoo.org/68395 Regenerating /etc/ld.so.cache...[ ok ] * If you intend to use the gcc from the new profile in an already * running shell, please remember to do: * If you have issues with packages unable to locate libstdc++.la, * then try running 'fix_libtool_files.sh' on the old gcc versions. * You might want to review the GCC upgrade guide when moving between * major versions (like 4.2 to 4.3): * http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml Regenerating /etc/ld.so.cache... Recording sys-devel/gcc in world favorites file... Auto-cleaning packages... No outdated packages were found on your system. * Regenerating GNU info directory index... * Processed 7 info files. What does that invalid profile mean, and how can I fix it? Well... it means that the active gcc profile is invalid :) You can have several gcc versions installed on your system for a given target arch; each version has an associated profile and you can choose the active one (i.e. which version is run when you type gcc) by using gcc-config. When you do a regular (i.e. -multislot) gcc upgrade, the active profile must be changed from the old version to the new one; the ebuild should take care of this for you but sometimes it chokes in the process. First you have some warnings about the old profile being broken -- which is expected as you just uninstalled the old gcc version: * gcc-config: Could not locate 'x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.3' [...] * gcc-config: Active gcc profile is invalid! gcc-config: error: could not run/locate 'gcc' Then the new profile is correctly selected: * Switching native-compiler to x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.4.4 ... It's not clear to me whether the following warnings (let alone the whole your gcc is broken scary thing) are caused by the new profile being actually broken or -- more likely -- by the problems encountered when trying to do something with the old profile. Try a simple gcc -v in a new shell. If it works, you are fine. If it does not work, try again after doing gcc-config 1. If it still does not work, well, you're in for lots of fun. HTH, andrea
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: Active gcc profile is invalid!
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:57:18 +0200, Jarry wrote: I just think it is somehow time-consuming, emerging gcc two times. Especially when I have to repeat it with my 12 gentoo servers. Sequentially, unfortunatally, as they share the same hardware... Why not use --buildpkg the first time and --usepkg the other 11 times? -- Neil Bothwick deja vous - the act of forgetting someone's name /again/ despite being introduced to them several times. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade from 3.x to 4.x, when should I run revdep-rebuild?
On 9/7/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading my gcc from 3.x to 4.x. I've done the gcc switching, and now I'm updating my system. The recommended steps are: # emerge -eav system # emerge -eav world While emerging my system I received a message suggesting I run revdep-rebuild: warning - be sure to run revdep-rebuild now Um, I believe you can ignore this. The emerge -eav world will rebuild all packages...there is nothing that revdep-rebuild will catch that world won't. Now if you want to keep /using/ the system while it is rebuilding, you could do: emerge -eav system # if already complete, don't repeat revdep-rebuild --library libstdc++.so.6 emerge -eav world The revdep-rebuild command will recompile all C++ applications, and will take a damn long time to run. But less time than rebuilding world, and once it completes, your C++ apps should at least be sane. Otherwise you might get ABI conflicts while the world rebuild is going on. Of course, those same C++ apps are going to be rebuilt during the world step...which is kind of lame. There are some tricks you can use to avoid rebuilding things twice...search the archives of this list for ideas. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade from 3.x to 4.x, when should I run revdep-rebuild?
On Thursday 07 September 2006 23:34, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm upgrading my gcc from 3.x to 4.x. I've done the gcc switching, and now I'm updating my system. The recommended steps are: # emerge -eav system # emerge -eav world While emerging my system I received a message suggesting I run revdep-rebuild: warning - be sure to run revdep-rebuild now My question is, should I run revdep-rebuild right after emerging the system, or should I wait until after I emerge world? My concern was that in between, my system is in an unstable intermediate state, and it might be damaged by a revdep-rebuild in between. There's no need to run revdep-rebuild, whatever you do it will be redundant. The notices you are seeing are primarily intended for when you explicitly emerge packages that other packages may link to. So everything that might be relevant to the notice you see is going to be recompiled anyway when you run 'emerge -e world'. As previously noted on this list, the mention of using revdep-rebuild as a shortcut when upgrading gcc was intended for the move from 3.3 to 3.4 *only*. The specifics of that upgrade made this shortcut possible, in all other upgrades you definitely don't use it. i.e. the guide is in need of an uodate to make this explicitly clear. If you need more info, ask Richard for the inside dope - he's the resident gcc expert around here :-) alan -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade from 3.x to 4.x, when should I run revdep-rebuild?
On 9/8/06, Alan McKinnon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard for the inside dope - he's the resident gcc expert around here :-) :-P -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade (part 2): dietlibc error...
Richard Fish wrote: echo dev-libs/dietlibc ~amd64 /etc/portage/package.keywords I did... emerge --resume It still wanted to emerge dietlibc-0.28 If for some reason this tries to merge dietlibc-0.28 again, then do emerge --oneshot dietlibc This worked, dietlibc-0.30 has been emerged emerge --resume OMG, again portage wants to re-emerge dietlibc-0.28! Why? Can I somehow start emerge --resume but without the first package which previously caused error (in this case dietlibc-0.28)? I do not want to go over the whole thing again again, it takes 7 hours... Jarry -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade (part 2): dietlibc error...
On Thursday 07 September 2006 17:30, Jarry wrote: OMG, again portage wants to re-emerge dietlibc-0.28! Why? Can I somehow start emerge --resume but without the first package which previously caused error (in this case dietlibc-0.28)? I do not want to go over the whole thing again again, it takes 7 hours... Read `man emerge`. emerge --skipfirst -- Bo Andresen pgpAIePfBujaA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: openldap/perl error...
Richard Fish wrote: !!! You must have a complete (USE='-minimal') Perl install to use the perl backend! Does your make.conf have minimal in USE? If so, that is probably a bad idea. If there are specific packages you want to build with minimal (like x.org), you should use /etc/portage/package.use for that. Thank your for your help. I have put dev-lang/perl -minimal in my package.use, and doing emerge -eav again... Concerning your opinion about minimal-flag: I do have minimal and -* in global USE flags and I think it is a good idea. Something that belongs to gentoo spirit: to start with minimum, and slowly add only functions which I really want and need (something similar are good firewall rules: start with everything denied, and open only what you really need)... Of course, sometimes one can hit the wall when the things do not work as expected (like when I emerged mysql with minimal flag, and it was not server, only client). But this disadvantage is definitely worth having clean and compact system, and that is what I like on gentoo. After all, there are experienced users on list, who can always help... :-) Jarry -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade (part 2): dietlibc error...
On 9/6/06, Jarry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, gcc upgrade is not so painless as one might think. Any ideas how to fix this? Looks like you need to use dietlibc-0.30 with gcc-4.1: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=140905 -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade (part 2): dietlibc error...
Richard Fish wrote: On 9/6/06, Jarry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, gcc upgrade is not so painless as one might think. Any ideas how to fix this? Looks like you need to use dietlibc-0.30 with gcc-4.1: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=140905 Hm, but 0.28 is stable, 0.30 is ~ (amd64) Moreover, I have read it, but there is remark: dietlibc-0.30 is broken on amd64, see bug #138468 OK, I will try it, but how? I'm in the middle of updating my world after gcc-update. I will add dev-libs/dietlibc ~amd64 into packages.keywords, but what then? Again emerge -eav world? Or should I first update only dietlibc and then world? Jarry -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade (part 2): dietlibc error...
On 9/6/06, Jarry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hm, but 0.28 is stable, 0.30 is ~ (amd64) Yeah, unfortunately not all of the gcc-4.1 fixes made it to stable _before_ gcc-4.1. It's too late for the 4.1 upgrade, but as a userrep, I do plan to raise this as an issue when the next gcc upgrade cycle comes around. :-( OK, I will try it, but how? I'm in the middle of updating my world after gcc-update. I will add dev-libs/dietlibc ~amd64 into packages.keywords, but what then? Again emerge -eav world? This should do it: echo dev-libs/dietlibc ~amd64 /etc/portage/package.keywords emerge --resume If for some reason this tries to merge dietlibc-0.28 again, then do emerge --oneshot dietlibc emerge --resume -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: openldap/perl error...
On 9/4/06, Jarry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to send it, but this is *everything* that was in log-file. Nothing more. So where can I find those lines above? Probably in the output of the build. So you'll have to try building it again. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: openldap/perl error...
Richard Fish wrote: Probably in the output of the build. So you'll have to try building it again. This is everything I was able to find in $PORT_LOGDIR or screen: - - tail /var/log/emerge.log 1157483054: emerge (149 of 206) net-nds/openldap-2.3.24-r1 to / 1157483054: === (149 of 206) Cleaning (net-nds/openldap-2.3.24-r1::/usr/portage/net-nds/openldap/openldap-2.3.24-r1.ebuild) 1157483054: === (149 of 206) Compiling/Merging (net-nds/openldap-2.3.24-r1::/usr/portage/net-nds/openldap/openldap-2.3.24-r1.ebuild) 1157483055: *** terminating. - more /var/log/portage/3714-openldap-2.3.24-r1.log !!! ERROR: net-nds/openldap-2.3.24-r1 failed. Call stack: ebuild.sh, line 1555: Called dyn_setup ebuild.sh, line 668: Called pkg_setup openldap-2.3.24-r1.ebuild, line 152: Called die !!! You must have a complete (USE='-minimal') Perl install to use the perl backend! !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, and the call stack if relevant. - in /var/log/portage/elog: nothing about this package - captured from ternimal screen: ... Emerging (149 of 206) net-nds/openldap-2.3.24-r1 to / checking ebuild checksums ;-) checking auxfile checksums ;-) checking miscfile checksums ;-) checking openldap-2.3.24.tgz ;-) !!! ERROR: net-nds/openldap-2.3.24-r1 failed. Call stack: ebuild.sh, line 1555: Called dyn_setup ebuild.sh, line 668: Called pkg_setup openldap-2.3.24-r1.ebuild, line 152: Called die !!! You must have a complete (USE='-minimal') Perl install to use the perl backend! !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, and the call stack if relevant. - There is really nothing more about this error in logs anywhere... Does it mean I must add: dev-lang/perl -minimal in /etc/portage/package.use ? Or sys-devel/libperl? Or some other perl-module? But how is it possible that up to now everything was OK, just when I upgraded gcc, suddenly I must change use-flags? BTW, is it somehow possible just continue with that emerge -eav world? 149 of 206 packages have been already emerged, I do not want to wait 5 hours again... Jarry -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: openldap/perl error...
On 9/4/06, Jarry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, and the call stack if relevant. Do this. The actual error is some lines above in the actual configuration output. *NOT* the line that starts with !!! ERRROR. We need to see the actual error if we are going to have any chance of helping. -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: openldap/perl error...
Richard Fish wrote: On 9/4/06, Jarry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, and the call stack if relevant. Do this. The actual error is some lines above in the actual configuration output. *NOT* the line that starts with !!! ERRROR. We need to see the actual error if we are going to have any chance of helping. I would like to send it, but this is *everything* that was in log-file. Nothing more. So where can I find those lines above? Jarry -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: what's safest option?
On 8/12/06, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a couple of questions: - Is it safe to upgrade with a full desktop (Xorg+Xfce+Thunderbird+Firefox...) system running, or will I get everything crashing on me? If you start things up beforehand and leave them running, this should be safe. Just be sure to follow section 3 of the gcc upgrade guide here: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml You will only need the sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 package if you have old binary stuff installed. I would actually recommend a slightly modified version of those instructions though: emerge -uv gcc gcc-config ... # or eselect compiler set source /etc/profile emerge --oneshot libtool revdep-rebuild --library=libstdc++.so.5 emerge -C =sys-devel/gcc-3.3* emerge -e world The revdep-rebuild step is a fast way of rebuilding all C++ packages. During this phase, you may have some programs fail to start, but once it completes, your system should be fine again. The final emerge -e world is optionalused mostly to get any new optimizations that are available. Of course if there are any problems left over by revdep-rebuild, the emerge -e world should fix them. - If not, is it safe to upgrade using Knoppix and doing the upgrade in a chroot? are there side effects? This wouldn't make any difference at all. The risk of the gcc upgrade comes from the upgrading libstdc++.so.5 to libstdc++.so.6, which has an incompatible binary interface. What you really do *not* want is to have some programs that link against both .5 and .6 at the same time. This could happen for example if you rebuild qt, qt will get linked against .6, but kdelibs may still be linked against .5. So when you start a KDE app (which link against both qt and kdelibs), it may crash due to the two incompatible versions of libstdc++. This is why I say some things may fail during the revdep-rebuild step above. So since you would chrooting into your system, and using the compilers and libraries from your system, the knoppix kernel buys you nothing here as far as safety. It should be noted that python links against libstdc++, and since portage relies on a working python, it would be a very good idea to quickpkg python and gcc before beginning. Then should something go catastrophically wrong, you should be able to untar python and/or gcc to get back to a working environment... Good Luck, -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade
On 8/12/06, Daniel D Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: emerge -uav gcc If I use the -u switch, portage tells me there's nothing to merge. If I simply do an emerge -p, portage says that it's going to install gcc-3.4. How do I identify what's telling portage not to update gcc? This probably just means you already have gcc 3.4 installed, and can skip this step (start with the gcc-config/eselect compiler step). If I follow the rest of the guide, is it safe (for reasonable definitions of the word) to emerge gcc without the update switch? If you don't actually already have it installed, yes, but you may want to take a look at my answer to brullonulla on the same topic... -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade: what's safest option?
Richard Fish wrote: On 8/12/06, b.n. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a couple of questions: - Is it safe to upgrade with a full desktop (Xorg+Xfce+Thunderbird+Firefox...) system running, or will I get everything crashing on me? If you start things up beforehand and leave them running, this should be safe. OK. Just be sure to follow section 3 of the gcc upgrade guide here: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml Yes, that's my little precious bible now. I would actually recommend a slightly modified version of those instructions though: emerge -uv gcc gcc-config ... # or eselect compiler set source /etc/profile emerge --oneshot libtool revdep-rebuild --library=libstdc++.so.5 emerge -C =sys-devel/gcc-3.3* emerge -e world Thanks. It seems to make sense. So since you would chrooting into your system, and using the compilers and libraries from your system, the knoppix kernel buys you nothing here as far as safety. Yes, but by using Knoppix apps these shouldn't crash, being independent from the chroot environment. My concerns were mostly about the peril of X crashing (and being temporarly unable to come again up) vs memory usage penalty with a knoppix (but chrooted environment, no apps crashing). However I guess I'll start the recompile tonight and eventually spend tomorrow reading and cleaning home... It should be noted that python links against libstdc++, and since portage relies on a working python, it would be a very good idea to quickpkg python and gcc before beginning. Then should something go catastrophically wrong, you should be able to untar python and/or gcc to get back to a working environment... This was already on my list :) Thanks, m. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC Upgrade Problems - Why does emerge --sync not work
Well I've wasted everybodt's timeon this ... sorry. It was a kernel problem. I had created a new one when configuring for cpufreqd and used the wrong processor type. Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC Upgrade Problems - Why does emerge --sync not work
Starting retry 3 of 3 with rsync://140.211.166.165/gentoo-portage Checking server timestamp ... rsync: failed to connect to 140.211.166.165: Connection refused (111) rsync error: error in socket IO (code 10) at clientserver.c(107) [receiver=2.6.8] The server is refusing the connection, there's nothing wrong at your end except you need to try a different rsync server. Thanks ... I figured this bit out last night ... Sorry. I'm still puzzled why my lap top keeps freezing. Usually when the screen saver cuts in. The last things I've done are upgrade GCC and follow the power managment guide for my laptop. Are there any obvious mistakes that would cause this? Thank, Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade and Portage questions
On 6/14/06, Jesse Hannah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. Has anyone noticed if programs compiled with the latest gcc (4.1.1, I believe) are any faster than those compiled with 3.4.6-r1? Also, is there any difference in the required time to compile? Any other issues I should know about with upgrading from 3.4.6-r1 to 4.1.1? (I use a pre-Prescott P4 3000MHz, so it'd be nice if anyone had information for that or a comparable architecture.) I didn't notice any speed change after recompiling. 2. If I want to upgrade and rebuild my entire system (using a new gcc), is: emerge -u gcc emerge -e world the right thing to do? Am I missing anything there? http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml Has everything you need to know... (Note: if it makes any difference, I have ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 set in my /etc/make.conf. Any problems this could cause?) So do I. So far, so good... Except that I use binary openoffice. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade and Portage questions
On 6/14/06, Daniel da Veiga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/14/06, Jesse Hannah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. If I want to upgrade and rebuild my entire system (using a new gcc), is: emerge -u gcc emerge -e world the right thing to do? Am I missing anything there? http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gcc-upgrading.xml Has everything you need to know... Yes, definitely follow the guide. During the emege -e world, if you use MAKEOPTS=-jN, where N1, you may notice some things fail to build (at least I did). Doing a MAKEOPTS=-j1 emerge -e --resume world is the way around most problems. Also, if you use KDE, you may want to checkout the kdehiddenvisibility flag before commencing the emerge -e world. Setting it should improve KDE startup times. I can't say I noticed a dramatic speedup, but my laptop is definitely at the high-end of the performance range... -Richard -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, portage niceness and distcc
One solution to this issue is to use the faster server as a binary host for the slower one. I was able to do something similar with a slow laptop and a fast desktop machine. I'm not in front of my gentoo machine right now, so I can't provide the exact details, but it goes something like this: On the fast machine (you can optionally do all of this inside a chroot): 1) set-up an ftp server and create a new user for the slower machine to use 2) in make.conf, set PKGDIR to a directory accessible to the ftp user created above 3) for each package you want to install on the slow machine, run: # emerge -B package name (Also, in make.conf, you can add buildpkg in FEATURES to always build binary packages whenever you emerge something.) On the slow machine: 1) in make.conf, add getbinpkg to FEATURES 2) in make.conf, set PORTAGE_BINHOST to ftp://login:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/path/to/binpkgs where fastmachine is the address of the fast machine used to build the packages. 3) then try to emerge the package on the slow machine This setup worked for me, but, of course, YMMV Matt On 5/4/06, Daniel da Veiga [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello List, I've been trying to upgrade an really old machine to the new gcc, and so, following the guide, I'm at the emerge --oneshot sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 step. This old hardware suits my needs for a web server and MySQL mirror, but that's about the charge it can handle, so, I've set PORTAGE_NICENESS to 15, I don't mind if it take a whole month to compile, but it must be responsive to other processes all the time. What I've noticed is that the process is using nice 0 (that pretty much makes the machine unusable), and distcc is not working, if it was, I'm pretty sure the time would reduce greatly because other emerge operations that use it are getting super fast responses thanks to the distcc and ccache wonders (my host is already upgraded). Is there a way to compile this or migrate GCC with binary packages or something like it? I have compatible CHOSTs flags on both machines and the other one is a fast server. Any advice would be great. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, portage niceness and distcc
On 5/4/06, Matthew Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One solution to this issue is to use the faster server as a binary host for the slower one. I was able to do something similar with a slow laptop and a fast desktop machine. I'm not in front of my gentoo machine right now, so I can't provide the exact details, but it goes something like this: On the fast machine (you can optionally do all of this inside a chroot): 1) set-up an ftp server and create a new user for the slower machine to use 2) in make.conf, set PKGDIR to a directory accessible to the ftp user created above 3) for each package you want to install on the slow machine, run: # emerge -B package name (Also, in make.conf, you can add buildpkg in FEATURES to always build binary packages whenever you emerge something.) On the slow machine: 1) in make.conf, add getbinpkg to FEATURES 2) in make.conf, set PORTAGE_BINHOST to ftp://login:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/path/to/binpkgs where fastmachine is the address of the fast machine used to build the packages. 3) then try to emerge the package on the slow machine This setup worked for me, but, of course, YMMV Matt Thanks Matt, I'll try this option by tomorrow morning and post if it works. I've never worked with the binhost option of portage, but now I can see a lot of advantages on it (reading the manual) that can be useful on future installations and/or upgrades. Gotta love Gentoo. -- Daniel da Veiga Computer Operator - RS - Brazil -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.1 GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ --END GEEK CODE BLOCK-- -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:41:14 -0800, Ryan Tandy wrote: Assuming it's the gcc-3.4.5-r1 update you're considering postponing, you could just: # echo 'sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5' /etc/portage/package.mask and just remove that line when you're ready to upgrade. It's a *far* better idea than trying to modify your profile. echo '=sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1' /etc/portage/package.mask is better if you only want to postpone this upgrade. Your suggestion blocks all future upgrades. -- Neil Bothwick Bother, said Pooh, as he drained the vodka bottle dry. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:41:14 -0800, Ryan Tandy wrote: Assuming it's the gcc-3.4.5-r1 update you're considering postponing, you could just: # echo 'sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5' /etc/portage/package.mask and just remove that line when you're ready to upgrade. It's a *far* better idea than trying to modify your profile. echo '=sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1' /etc/portage/package.mask is better if you only want to postpone this upgrade. Your suggestion blocks all future upgrades. Why don't upgrade? As far as I know upgrading gcc isn't a big deal. It was just the 3.3.x - 3.4.x that was due to that the api for c++ had changed. -- Naga -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Le mardi 28 mars 2006 à 20:41 -0800, Ryan Tandy a écrit : Teresa and Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 09:50:28 -0600, Teresa and Dale wrote: Thanks to both. I looked in my world file and I think I upgraded as a oneshot so why is it upgradeing? I did the -t option and nothing else is coming up as pulling it in. Strange. gcc is part of system. LOL That would be a good reason huh? Where is that file? I'm not real sure about upgrading this thing right now. Oh, what the heck. I'll upgrade it anyway. Thanks Dale :-) Assuming it's the gcc-3.4.5-r1 update you're considering postponing, you could just: # echo 'sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5' /etc/portage/package.mask and just remove that line when you're ready to upgrade. It's a *far* better idea than trying to modify your profile. upgrading from 3.4.5 to 3.4.5-r1 won't change the system so you will not have to rebuild anything :) it's an upgrade to gcc = 4.0 that needs a emerge -e world -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
On Wednesday 29 March 2006 07:10, Teresa and Dale wrote: I was just going to mask it or upgrade by hand till I had time to mess with it. I got me a new girlfriend and she has two kids. I go from nobody to worry about but me to me and three other people to worry about. Just don't have as much time as I used to have. One boy plays baseball and the other does cub scouts. :/ I'll get around to it eventually. Dale emerge -u world there is nothing to worry about. Or do you sit in front of your monitor and watch it compile? -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Nagatoro wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 20:41:14 -0800, Ryan Tandy wrote: Assuming it's the gcc-3.4.5-r1 update you're considering postponing, you could just: # echo 'sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5' /etc/portage/package.mask and just remove that line when you're ready to upgrade. It's a *far* better idea than trying to modify your profile. echo '=sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1' /etc/portage/package.mask is better if you only want to postpone this upgrade. Your suggestion blocks all future upgrades. Why don't upgrade? As far as I know upgrading gcc isn't a big deal. It was just the 3.3.x - 3.4.x that was due to that the api for c++ had changed. Oh, I thought it was a big deal. That's why I was wanting to wait. Funny thing is, it don't want to upgrade now so maybe it had a bug and they set it back again or something, or I just missed it and upgraded anyway. ;-) Dale :-) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Teresa and Dale schreef Nagatoro wrote: Why don't upgrade? As far as I know upgrading gcc isn't a big deal. It was just the 3.3.x - 3.4.x that was due to that the api for c++ had changed. Oh, I thought it was a big deal. That's why I was wanting to wait. Funny thing is, it don't want to upgrade now so maybe it had a bug and they set it back again or something, or I just missed it and upgraded anyway. ;-) (other) Funny thing is, last I heard, you were planning to mask the upgrade versions of GCC. If you did that, of /course/ you are no longer offered upgrades, since that's the point of masking (to mark a package as unavailable to be installed on this computer). gcc-3.4.5-r1 is the most recent stable; current unstable (~x86) is 3.4.6, 4.0 is masked (hard-masked), so you wouldn't see it anyway. So I'm guessing you are running stable only, and masked the most recent stable version explicitly (3.4.5-r1)? If you masked only that version in /etc/portage/package.mask, like so =sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 you won't see an offer to update until 3.4.6 goes stable; if you masked all versions above your current version, as in | =sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 you won't see an offer to update ever, until you adjust the mask. Although when 4.0 makes it into the tree, it might use a different slot, so that might make you an offer. But as far as I know, 3.4.5-r1 is still alive and kicking in the tree. Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Holly Bostick wrote: (other) Funny thing is, last I heard, you were planning to mask the upgrade versions of GCC. If you did that, of /course/ you are no longer offered upgrades, since that's the point of masking (to mark a package as unavailable to be installed on this computer). gcc-3.4.5-r1 is the most recent stable; current unstable (~x86) is 3.4.6, 4.0 is masked (hard-masked), so you wouldn't see it anyway. So I'm guessing you are running stable only, and masked the most recent stable version explicitly (3.4.5-r1)? If you masked only that version in /etc/portage/package.mask, like so =sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 you won't see an offer to update until 3.4.6 goes stable; if you masked all versions above your current version, as in | =sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 you won't see an offer to update ever, until you adjust the mask. Although when 4.0 makes it into the tree, it might use a different slot, so that might make you an offer. But as far as I know, 3.4.5-r1 is still alive and kicking in the tree. Holly Well, I didn't get around to changing anything in the mask file so either it did it and I forgot it or some ghost came in and took care of it for me. ;-) I guess since it was a minor update it won't matter anyway. Nice to hear from you again though Holly. Take Care. Dale :-) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 00:06:54 -0600, Teresa and Dale wrote: I upgraded gcc a while back. I thought I read somewhere that it is best to just upgrade on occasion with the major upgrades. Should this be upgraded or should I mask it? This is what I get: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # emerge -up world These are the packages that I would merge, in order: Calculating world dependencies ...done! [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-config-1.3.13-r1 [1.3.12-r6] [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 [3.4.5] Read the changelog and decide for yourself. emerge --changelog gcc will show you the changes and the reason for the upgrade. I really don't want to do a emerge -e world or rebuild a lot right now. I am glad to see the new Scribus though. ;-) You don't have to do an emerge -e- world for a minor update to GCC. Maybe when you go from 3.3 to 3.4, or 3.4 to 4.0, but not for this. -- Neil Bothwick Bookmark - A means of returning to where you got lost last time. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
On Tuesday 28 March 2006 08:06, Teresa and Dale wrote: Hi, I upgraded gcc a while back. I thought I read somewhere that it is best to just upgrade on occasion with the major upgrades. Should this be upgraded or should I mask it? This is what I get: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # emerge -up world These are the packages that I would merge, in order: Calculating world dependencies ...done! [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-config-1.3.13-r1 [1.3.12-r6] [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 [3.4.5] [ebuild U ] app-office/scribus-1.3.3 [1.3.2-r1] [ebuild U ] sys-apps/dbus-0.61-r1 [0.61] [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # I really don't want to do a emerge -e world or rebuild a lot right now. I am glad to see the new Scribus though. ;-) you don't have to. As long as you are not updating to gcc4 you never need to make an emerge -e world. Not because of gcc updates and never because of glibc updates. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote: On Tuesday 28 March 2006 08:06, Teresa and Dale wrote: Hi, I upgraded gcc a while back. I thought I read somewhere that it is best to just upgrade on occasion with the major upgrades. Should this be upgraded or should I mask it? This is what I get: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # emerge -up world These are the packages that I would merge, in order: Calculating world dependencies ...done! [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-config-1.3.13-r1 [1.3.12-r6] [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5-r1 [3.4.5] [ebuild U ] app-office/scribus-1.3.3 [1.3.2-r1] [ebuild U ] sys-apps/dbus-0.61-r1 [0.61] [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # I really don't want to do a emerge -e world or rebuild a lot right now. I am glad to see the new Scribus though. ;-) you don't have to. As long as you are not updating to gcc4 you never need to make an emerge -e world. Not because of gcc updates and never because of glibc updates. Thanks to both. I looked in my world file and I think I upgraded as a oneshot so why is it upgradeing? I did the -t option and nothing else is coming up as pulling it in. Strange. Thanks Dale :-) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 09:50:28 -0600, Teresa and Dale wrote: Thanks to both. I looked in my world file and I think I upgraded as a oneshot so why is it upgradeing? I did the -t option and nothing else is coming up as pulling it in. Strange. gcc is part of system. -- Neil Bothwick Justify my text? I'm sorry but it has no excuse. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 09:50:28 -0600, Teresa and Dale wrote: Thanks to both. I looked in my world file and I think I upgraded as a oneshot so why is it upgradeing? I did the -t option and nothing else is coming up as pulling it in. Strange. gcc is part of system. LOL That would be a good reason huh? Where is that file? I'm not real sure about upgrading this thing right now. Oh, what the heck. I'll upgrade it anyway. Thanks Dale :-) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Teresa and Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 09:50:28 -0600, Teresa and Dale wrote: Thanks to both. I looked in my world file and I think I upgraded as a oneshot so why is it upgradeing? I did the -t option and nothing else is coming up as pulling it in. Strange. gcc is part of system. LOL That would be a good reason huh? Where is that file? I'm not real sure about upgrading this thing right now. Oh, what the heck. I'll upgrade it anyway. Thanks Dale :-) Assuming it's the gcc-3.4.5-r1 update you're considering postponing, you could just: # echo 'sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5' /etc/portage/package.mask and just remove that line when you're ready to upgrade. It's a *far* better idea than trying to modify your profile. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade, should it upgrade?
Ryan Tandy wrote: Teresa and Dale wrote: Neil Bothwick wrote: gcc is part of system. LOL That would be a good reason huh? Where is that file? I'm not real sure about upgrading this thing right now. Oh, what the heck. I'll upgrade it anyway. Thanks Dale :-) Assuming it's the gcc-3.4.5-r1 update you're considering postponing, you could just: # echo 'sys-devel/gcc-3.4.5' /etc/portage/package.mask and just remove that line when you're ready to upgrade. It's a *far* better idea than trying to modify your profile. I was just going to mask it or upgrade by hand till I had time to mess with it. I got me a new girlfriend and she has two kids. I go from nobody to worry about but me to me and three other people to worry about. Just don't have as much time as I used to have. One boy plays baseball and the other does cub scouts. :/ I'll get around to it eventually. Dale :-) -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc Upgrade Problem
On 08:06 Sun 04 Dec , C. Beamer wrote:
Hi all,
I was upgrading gcc using the directions in the GCC Upgrade Guide. All
was going well. I was user what the Guide refers to as the safer
method. I got to the 321 of 642 mark and the upgrade bombed.
The specific upgrade being done was cyrus-sasl. Early in the output it
complained about both gdbm and berkdb USE flags being set. Then, a
message was displayed that it would be best to build this package with
berkdb and told me how to set this in my package.use file. The build
waited 10 seconds and then proceeded. This occurred overnight, so I'm
just finding this out.
Immediately after waiting the 10 seconds for a response to the db issue,
the build process displayed this message:
* If you are still using postfix-sasl-saslauthd-pam-mysql for
* authentication, please edit /etc/conf.d/saslauthd to read:
* SASLAUTHD_OPTS=${SASLAUTH_MECH} -a pam -r
* Don't forget to restart the service: `/etc/init.d/saslauthd restart`.
I'm not exactly sure what this means. I do have mysql on my system and
have to provide a password when I use the database associated with it,
but beyond that, I don't know if I should be doing what this message is
telling me or not. Assistance here would be appreciated.
Again, a pause for 10 seconds occurred while waiting for a response, but
since I was asleep and didn't give one, the build went ahead.
The configure process completed and the make started.
The last few lines before the make process bombed and the first couple
of lines of the error message are as follows:
ar cru .libs/libsasldb.a db_gdbm.o allockey.o
ar: allockey.o: No such file or directorymake[2]: *** [libsasldb.a] Error 1
make[2]: *** [libsasldb.a] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory
`/var/tmp/portage/cyrus-sasl-2.1.20/work/cyrus-sasl-2.1.20/sasldb'
If I am interpreting this correctly, it the configure and build went
ahead using gdbm rather than berkdb and the correction would be to edit
my package.use file as previously indicated and rebuild.
However, my issue is that since I was at the 321/642 point of doing the
'emerge -e' world' portion of the upgrade, I don't know how to rectify
the problems and continue with the upgrade. Or do I have to start from
scratch with the 'emerge -e world'?
Can someone offer some guidance here?
I apologize for the length of this, but wanted to make sure that I
included all the details that might be relevant.
Regards,
Colleen
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Hi,
At the end of that same quide there're some hints on most common errors.
So to just continue on with the recompile run:#emerge --resume --skipfirst.
But that will work only if no other emerge command was run in between.
Later you could investigate about this error.
It seems it just a matter of choosing the right way to authenticate.
HTH.Rumen
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade / downgrade infinite loop
Hello, Can anybody tell me why portage constantly upgrade and then downgrade GCC (versions 3.3.5 3.3.6) each time I emerge -pvuD world ??? A little trick I do when this kind of stuff happens. In portage, there's a file called /etc/portage/package.mask. You can use it to mask packages that aren't in /usr/portage/profile/package.mask. It is however, useful in finding out why packages are downgrading. So, here's what you can do: echo =sys-devel/gcc-3.3.5 /etc/portage/package.mask Cool idea, but on better is to do the following: echo sys-devel/gcc-3.3.6 /etc/portage/package.mask I tried what you suggested for a different package and it wanted to downgrade to an earlier version than the one I masked. The will not let it downgrade. Thanks for your tip! Sean -- Sean Higgins, [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.systura.com - Where information becomes knowledge. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] GCC upgrade / downgrade infinite loop
On Monday 19 September 2005 07:57, Yann Garnier wrote: Greetings everyone, Can anybody tell me why portage constantly upgrade and then downgrade GCC (versions 3.3.5 3.3.6) each time I emerge -pvuD world ??? A little trick I do when this kind of stuff happens. In portage, there's a file called /etc/portage/package.mask. You can use it to mask packages that aren't in /usr/portage/profile/package.mask. It is however, useful in finding out why packages are downgrading. So, here's what you can do: echo =sys-devel/gcc-3.3.5 /etc/portage/package.mask This will mask gcc 3.3.5. Now, when the package that wants gcc 3.3.5 is about to be emerged, portage will notice that gcc 3.3.5 is masked and complain. This complaining will do the nice favor of showing you what package needs it, and find out why it does. After this you'll want to remove the package.mask entry to avoid any sort of chaos. Hope this helps. In advance thank you Yann Garnier Chris White pgp8t9uDCWrXF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade
C R. Little wrote: when upgrading to a new version of gcc is all you have to do is emerge the newer version and it works? the package has a S beside it so how does the system know which version to use? Hi, By using gcc-config which is a dependency for gcc. Run gcc-config --help to check the options. IIRC after emerge the newer version becomes the default one, but that can be changed. HTH. Rumen smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade
On 5/26/05, C R. Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when upgrading to a new version of gcc is all you have to do is emerge the newer version and it works? the package has a S beside it so how does the system know which version to use? # emerge -u gcc # gcc-config -l # gcc-config new profile and then, if you you want to use this new version in an already opened terminal, do: # env-update # source /etc/profile Julien. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade
if you have a pentium-m processor is it better to upgrade to the newer version of gcc or stick with the stable release using the pentium-3 cflag? -Original Message- From: Julien Cayzac [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 2:12 PM To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade On 5/26/05, C R. Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when upgrading to a new version of gcc is all you have to do is emerge the newer version and it works? the package has a S beside it so how does the system know which version to use? # emerge -u gcc # gcc-config -l # gcc-config new profile and then, if you you want to use this new version in an already opened terminal, do: # env-update # source /etc/profile Julien. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] gcc upgrade
On 5/26/05, C R. Little [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you have a pentium-m processor is it better to upgrade to the newer version of gcc or stick with the stable release using the pentium-3 cflag? What do you mean by newer? If it's gcc 3.4, it's not new, and it the best you can use. If it's gcc 4.0, don't use it. It's a complete redesign of gcc that will allow gcc maintainers to write better optimizing rules, but it's not ready for day to day use yet. It won't produce better code than gcc 3.4. Julien. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
