Hi,
>> /var/lib/rpm/Packages: DB_SECONDARY_BAD: Secondary index inconsistent
>> with
>> primary
>> error: db4 error(-30973) from dbcursor->get: DB_SECONDARY_BAD:
Secondary
>> index inconsistent with primary
>> rpm: rpmdb.c:2179: rpmmiNext: Assertion `0' failed.
>> Aborted
>
> What sources are the
Hi,
the chroot environment that was producing bogus dependency messages when
checking BuildRequires last week has "moved on" to not installing binary
packages anymore, saying
/var/lib/rpm/Packages: DB_SECONDARY_BAD: Secondary index inconsistent with
primary
error: db4 error(-30973) from dbcursor->
Hi,
> Here's two more ways:
>
> 1) dumping the index
> cd /var/lib/rpm
> db_dump -p Providename
[r...@matterhorn rpm]# /usr/lib/rpm/bin/db_dump -p Providename |grep -A1
-B1 gdbm
\00\00\03O
gdbm
\00\00\03\d9
gdbm-debug\ac
\00\00\03T
gdbm-devel\ac
\00\00\04v
gdbm-static\95
\00
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:53:04 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On Feb 4, 2010, at 9:36 AM, Bernhard Rosenkränzer wrote:
>
> So only BuildRequires: ? I'll look, so far I haven't
> paid much attention to BuildRequires and so I may have missed something.
Yes, so far it only h
This just started to happen inside a chroot environment with HEAD from
last week:
[r...@matterhorn ~]# rpm -ivh /openldap-2.4.19-1ark.src.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
gdbm-devel is needed by openldap-2.4.19-1ark.src
openssl-devel is needed by openldap-2.4.19-1ark.src
pam
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:23:30 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> I can likely guess what needs to be done, but it would help if you
> could send along the -vv spewage so I can confirm my guess.
D: pool fd: created size 212 limit -1 flags 0
D: pool lua:created size 32 limit -1 flags 0
D: pool ts:
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:26:23 +0100, Bernhard Rosenkränzer
wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 23:42:37 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
>> On Jan 25, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Bernhard Rosenkränzer wrote:
>>> trying to install a new system into a chroot jail currently fails:
>>> # rpm -r
Possibly caused by a slightly corrupted rpmdb, it has gone through its
share of updates to HEAD snapshots...
Starting program: /bin/rpm -e kdepim
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
Freeing read locks for locker 0x21: 1542/140325654452096
Freeing read locks for locker 0x23: 1542/14032565
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 23:42:37 -0500, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On Jan 25, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Bernhard Rosenkränzer wrote:
>> trying to install a new system into a chroot jail currently fails:
>> # rpm -r /mnt/dest -ivh /RPMS/*.rpm
>> rpm: rpmdb.c:254:dbiOpen: Assertion `__dbapi
Hi,
trying to install a new system into a chroot jail currently fails:
# rpm -r /mnt/dest -ivh /RPMS/*.rpm
rpm: rpmdb.c:254:dbiOpen: Assertion `__dbapi == 3 || __dbapi == 4' failed.
(The same thing works if I run the command from a proper system rather
than a stripped down system that doesn't hav
On Tuesday 12 May 2009 21.18:48 Mark Hatle wrote:
> We handle this by doing installs in the following order:
> *) passwd/group (rpm2cpio)
> *) filesystem/basesystem/setup
> *) "Everything else"
Our approach is rather similar --
1. Install filesystem/basesystem
2. Install setup
3. rpm -Uvh --force
Hi,
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 20.56:42 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> There's this build failure with embedded javascript
> that's not yet handled in rpm/js/src/Makefile.am:
try
BUILT_SOURCES = jsautocfg.h jsautokw.h
ttyl
bero
On Monday 16 February 2009 15.49:53 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Adding XZ (instead of LZMA) internal has fixed the
assertion
> failure reproducer for me on HEAD.
Works for me here too, also with --with-xz=external
> AFAIK, LZMA_Alone is still
> well supported by XZ, and so there's no further need for
Hi,
the attached patch makes current git apt-rpm build with
rpm5 again, and shouldn't have any bad side effects.
It doesn't work 100% though: It fails to resolve file
dependencies (e.g. it complains about "xauth: Depends:
/bin/sh but it is not installable" when rpm --whatprovides
/bin/sh knows
I just hit an assertion while rebuilding a package with current
rpm CVS:
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
/var/tmp/lzma-root
rpm: ./rpmio_internal.h:318: fdGetFp: Assertion `fd !=
((void*)0) && fd->magic == 0x04463138' failed.
Aborted
Any ideas?
ttyl
bero
On Monday 26 January 2009 22.50:16 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Note that I've also added a filter to give you some control
> over new dependency loops.
>
> The basic idea is to count the number of '/' characters in
> the parent directory path, and use the # of slashes as a
> means to filter out relations
On Monday 26 January 2009 20.55:18 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Unsurprisingly, RPM "probe dependencies" were designed
for
> interoperating with a "native" package install, not for
bootstrapping
> from an empty chroot.
That's what I thought -- but I do think it would make sense to
look through what is
Hi,
we're finally at a point where we have all packages built with
rpm5 - and just tried to do a test install. Basically it works,
but we've spotted a few problems that appear to be rpm5
bugs.
Our installer does
mount /dev/something /mnt/dest
# Before that, /dev/something has been freshly form
I've just run into the old avoiding dependency problems
again, and (unless I'm overlooking something and there
already is a fix for this) I guess we need to add a new tag for
it...
In this particular case, a package containing a /proc/self/fd/0
-> /dev/stdin symlink is causing a dependency on
Hi,
I know this error message usually indicates a corrupted download or
somesuch -- but in this particular case, rebuilding the package doesn't help.
Trying to install
http://arklinux.osuosl.org/dockyard-devel/i586/libxml-static-2.6.32-1ark.i586.rpm
always results in
error: unpacking of archive
On Friday 18 July 2008 17.12:31 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> - rpm4compat: fix: rpmdsSingle() is a C, not a C++, routine.
That was right before - the purpose of rpmdsSingle() in rpm4compat.h
(intentionally in #ifdef __cplusplus) is a workaround for a difference
between C and C++:
In rpm4, rpmdsSingle
Hi,
I finally got around to fixing various problems with apt-rpm when used with
rpm5 -- the last being "apt-get update" hanging because of a bug in
rpm4compat.h.
Now it gets the lists and starts resolving dependencies, but it complains
about the rpm internal dependencies for loads of installed
In older rpm versions, this spec fragment would cause %_bindir/someapp to be
included:
%install
make install
# consolehelper comes from a different package, therefore the symlink
# being created here is dangling
ln -s consolehelper $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%_bindir/someapp
%files
%_bindir/*
In 5.1.4 (an
On Thursday 19 June 2008 14:16:54 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> Hmmm, here's a different issue with the package. LZMA payload
> identification and/or decompression will need to be looked at as well:
Weird, it installs just fine here.
Maybe it's an incompatibility between different lzma-utils versions, the
Trying to rebuild
http://arklinux.org/~bero/kdelibs-4.1.0-0.822040.1ark.src.rpm
with rpm 5.1.3 results in
error: line 106: Package does not exist: %description -n kimgio-exr
However, line 100 of the spec file does define that package unconditionally.
The same package worked with older rpm versio
On Saturday 14 June 2008 16.44:57 Bernhard Rosenkränzer wrote:
> In the particular case of apt, there's another thing I just noticed -- both
> rpm and apt come with an internalized version of lua.
> Chances are the simple symbol clash caused by this is what causes the
> crash. Gue
On Saturday 14 June 2008 15.55:21 Jeff Johnson wrote:
> There's a class of peculier issues with initializing under bindings
> and applications because the code paths are rather different. I get
> burned by the library <-> executable initialization differences
> frequently.
In the particular case o
27 matches
Mail list logo
