[arch-general] util-linux pacman error, file conflicts (safe to force?)
Tom, All, I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is: (72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/newgrp exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vigr exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vipw exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chfn.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chsh.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/login.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/newgrp.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vigr.8.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vipw.8.gz exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded. Is this safe to force? I ask because I don't want to kill login by forcing if there is a preferred way to do this.... What say the experts? (this has happened on all my boxes..) -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On 9 July 2012 16:49, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem
[...]
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum: http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467 where filesystem upgrade is suggested: pacman -Syuf But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
Thank you Mateusz! We will wait for the all clear from the devs before forcing. Arch Devs, when you can confirm a force is the proper way to handle this util-linux issue, please let us know. I'm just trying to avoid causing myself grief :) -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:01 PM, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
Thank you Mateusz!
We will wait for the all clear from the devs before forcing. Arch Devs, when you can confirm a force is the proper way to handle this util-linux issue, please let us know. I'm just trying to avoid causing myself grief :)
One strange thing is that the files generating the conflict are owned by the shadow package. I don't remember of any warning about forcing updates for util-linux in arch-devel. It seems to me like a packaging bug. -- A: Because it obfuscates the reading. Q: Why is top posting so bad? For more information, please read: http://idallen.com/topposting.html ------------------------------------------- Denis A. Altoe Falqueto Linux user #524555 -------------------------------------------
On 07/09/2012 11:10 AM, Denis A. Altoé Falqueto wrote:
One strange thing is that the files generating the conflict are owned by the shadow package. I don't remember of any warning about forcing updates for util-linux in arch-devel. It seems to me like a packaging bug.
Not a bug -- if the problem is due to shadow, then I have an older shadow package on my box. That gives me a place to start looking. I still have shadow 4.1.4.3-5 with the fudged build of shared libraries. I presume this is the cause of the conflict. I'll have to pick though the changes to find out if I can force the package. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 04:52:08PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 9 July 2012 16:49, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem
[...]
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
never -Syuf never -Suf never force an upgrade if anything you can do -Sf for one package at a time... but _do not_ for an upgrade. It will cause problems when you have upgrades like when pam had the stuff that is in pambase... pambase was installed and took control of the files in /etc/pam.d then when pambase upgraded, it removed those file, causeing sudo to not work and making it so the user couldn't login
On 9 July 2012 17:11, Daniel Wallace <daniel.wallace@gatech.edu> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 04:52:08PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 9 July 2012 16:49, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem
[...]
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
never -Syuf never -Suf never force an upgrade
In this particular case, what about: pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force what is advised on the ArchLinux ARM forum too. (Disclaimer: I'm newbie here.) Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
Op maandag 9 juli 2012 17:13:47 schreef Mateusz Loskot:
On 9 July 2012 17:11, Daniel Wallace <daniel.wallace@gatech.edu> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 04:52:08PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 9 July 2012 16:49, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem
[...]
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
never -Syuf never -Suf never force an upgrade
In this particular case, what about:
pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force
what is advised on the ArchLinux ARM forum too.
(Disclaimer: I'm newbie here.)
Best regards,
This is only valid concerning the update of the filesystem package from before 2012.6-2 to >= 2012.6-2 as noted in the newsitem [1]. Never use force if it was not advised like this in a newsitem. [1]http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesystem-upgrade-manual-intervention- required-1/ --Ike
On 9 July 2012 17:28, Ike Devolder <ike.devolder@gmail.com> wrote:
Op maandag 9 juli 2012 17:13:47 schreef Mateusz Loskot:
On 9 July 2012 17:11, Daniel Wallace <daniel.wallace@gatech.edu> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 04:52:08PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 9 July 2012 16:49, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem
[...]
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
never -Syuf never -Suf never force an upgrade
In this particular case, what about:
pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force
what is advised on the ArchLinux ARM forum too.
(Disclaimer: I'm newbie here.)
This is only valid concerning the update of the filesystem package from before 2012.6-2 to >= 2012.6-2 as noted in the newsitem [1]. Never use force if it was not advised like this in a newsitem.
[1]http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesystem-upgrade-manual-intervention- required-1/
Thanks Ike, that's really helpful bit. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Mateusz Loskot <mateusz@loskot.net> wrote:
On 9 July 2012 17:11, Daniel Wallace <daniel.wallace@gatech.edu> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 04:52:08PM +0100, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
On 9 July 2012 16:49, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem
[...]
Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
where filesystem upgrade is suggested:
pacman -Syuf
But, I'd wait until someone confirms it is the right way to go.
never -Syuf never -Suf never force an upgrade
In this particular case, what about:
pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force
This is a separate issue, which there was a news item about. David's question was not about filesystem, but about util-linux/shadow. Cheers, Tom
On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 10:49:46 -0500 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/newgrp exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vigr exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vipw exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chfn.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chsh.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/login.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/newgrp.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vigr.8.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vipw.8.gz exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
Is this safe to force? I ask because I don't want to kill login by forcing if there is a preferred way to do this.... What say the experts?
Hmm.. pacman should have taken care of this automatically. Do: pacman -Sy && pacman -Su --ignore util-linux,shadow && pacman -S shadow util-linux. If the last call fails, use --force. /bin/login was owned by shadow. Now it is owned why util-linux. Apparently utils-linux is tried first, that's why the update fails.
(this has happened on all my boxes..)
-- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@umail.iu.edu> wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 10:49:46 -0500 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/newgrp exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vigr exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vipw exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chfn.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chsh.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/login.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/newgrp.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vigr.8.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vipw.8.gz exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
Is this safe to force? I ask because I don't want to kill login by forcing if there is a preferred way to do this.... What say the experts?
Hmm.. pacman should have taken care of this automatically.
Do: pacman -Sy && pacman -Su --ignore util-linux,shadow && pacman -S shadow util-linux. If the last call fails, use --force.
Never use force, not even as a last resort, unless you really know that it is the right thing to do. It is very likely to end up deleting your files. -t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/09/2012 11:38 AM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
Hmm.. pacman should have taken care of this automatically.
Do: pacman -Sy && pacman -Su --ignore util-linux,shadow && pacman -S shadow util-linux. If the last call fails, use --force.
/bin/login was owned by shadow. Now it is owned why util-linux. Apparently utils-linux is tried first, that's why the update fails.
Thank you Leonid, I will have to rebuild shadow. My display manager still relies on the older shadow prior to the soname bump that occurred a couple of months ago. I guess I could just use the kde4/kdm in the interim. So at least we know what is causing this problem. Any background on why files such as 'login' are changing packages? Just curious really. In the 2.21.2 -> 2.21.3 update to util-linux, it inherited the following: +util-linux /bin/login +util-linux /etc/pam.d/chfn +util-linux /etc/pam.d/chsh +util-linux /etc/pam.d/login +util-linux /usr/bin/chfn +util-linux /usr/bin/chsh +util-linux /usr/bin/newgrp +util-linux /usr/sbin/vigr +util-linux /usr/sbin/vipw Was the driver behind it just 'housekeeping' for lack of better words? - -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk/7rZYACgkQZMpuZ8CyrciIVwCdFjcLU6isHRRVBxcF7x6O+VQl L30AmQFzkaJGfcbeAuskDDByQ2P5MCoY =6Qxp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[2012-07-09 23:20:38 -0500] David C. Rankin:
Any background on why files such as 'login' are changing packages?
Click on the "Subscribe" button there: http://mailman.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev-public -- Gaetan
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:49 PM, David C. Rankin <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:
Tom, All,
I ran into the following error regarding util-linux upgrade. I've looked in the forum and the website, but nothing specific to it. The error is:
(72/72) checking for file conflicts [###########################################] 100% error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files) util-linux: /bin/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /etc/pam.d/login exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chfn exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/chsh exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/bin/newgrp exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vigr exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/sbin/vipw exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chfn.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/chsh.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/login.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man1/newgrp.1.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vigr.8.gz exists in filesystem util-linux: /usr/share/man/man8/vipw.8.gz exists in filesystem Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
Upgrade shadow at the same time and it should solve the problem (or if not, specify the upgrade order manually as Leonid suggested, though I have not seen this beeing needed myself). Don't use --force. Tom
participants (8)
-
Daniel Wallace
-
David C. Rankin
-
Denis A. Altoé Falqueto
-
Gaetan Bisson
-
Ike Devolder
-
Leonid Isaev
-
Mateusz Loskot
-
Tom Gundersen