[arch-general] Linux still at 4.2, but nvidia and virtualbox compiled for 4.3?
So I just did an update and got the following messages: (16/24) upgrading nvidia [----------------------------------] 100% cat: /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.3-ARCH/version: No such file or directory .... (20/24) upgrading virtualbox-host-modules [----------------------------------] 100% cat: /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.3-ARCH/version: No such file or directory It seems like these are looking for Linux 4.3, but the linux package in [core] is still at 4.2. I'm afraid if I'll reboot, there will be problems with the graphics driver. Why wasn't the linux package updated alongside these others? Or am I wrong, and is this harmless?
It seems like these are looking for Linux 4.3, but the linux package in [core] is still at 4.2.
I'm afraid if I'll reboot, there will be problems with the graphics driver. Why wasn't the linux package updated alongside these others?
Or am I wrong, and is this harmless?
either your mirror is out of sync or we have an inconsistent repo state, where someone moved some modules bevore moving the kernel. in the signoff report from an hour ago linux-4.3-1 is fully signed off, but not moved yet. you can check the current state of the packages at the website. you fear for reboot seems legit - you could either wait for a consistent state (which is to appear soon) or manually take the respective packages from [testing] (or via the web interface. hope this helps.
Le dimanche 22 novembre 2015, 11:10:52 CET Sebastiaan Lokhorst a écrit :
So I just did an update and got the following messages:
(16/24) upgrading nvidia [----------------------------------] 100% cat: /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.3-ARCH/version: No such file or directory .... (20/24) upgrading virtualbox-host-modules [----------------------------------] 100% cat: /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.3-ARCH/version: No such file or directory
It seems like these are looking for Linux 4.3, but the linux package in [core] is still at 4.2.
I'm afraid if I'll reboot, there will be problems with the graphics driver. Why wasn't the linux package updated alongside these others?
Or am I wrong, and is this harmless?
This should be fixed with 5.0.10-2.1 version -- Laurent Carlier http://www.archlinux.org
2015-11-22 11:30 GMT+01:00 Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com>:
This should be fixed with 5.0.10-2.1 version
Thanks, it is! What about the nvidia package? Should I file a bug?
Le dimanche 22 novembre 2015, 12:08:28 CET Sebastiaan Lokhorst a écrit :
2015-11-22 11:30 GMT+01:00 Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com>:
This should be fixed with 5.0.10-2.1 version
Thanks, it is!
What about the nvidia package? Should I file a bug?
Should be fixed also with 358.16-2.1 version :) -- Laurent Carlier http://www.archlinux.org
2015-11-22 12:35 GMT+01:00 Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com>:
Le dimanche 22 novembre 2015, 12:08:28 CET Sebastiaan Lokhorst a écrit :
2015-11-22 11:30 GMT+01:00 Laurent Carlier <lordheavym@gmail.com>:
This should be fixed with 5.0.10-2.1 version
Thanks, it is!
What about the nvidia package? Should I file a bug?
Should be fixed also with 358.16-2.1 version :)
-- Laurent Carlier http://www.archlinux.org
Great! Thanks again for the fast response! :)
I'm afraid if I'll reboot, there will be problems with the graphics driver. Why wasn't the linux package updated alongside these others?
Or am I wrong, and is this harmless? Boy, I wish I was as cautious as you before updating... I was about to post that after updating nvidia drivers, trying to start the X will get you a black screen. I had assumed it was related to the custom kernel and/or DKMS, but the problem appears with the regular nvidia package and kernel. Well, I guess I can always downgrade.
Thanks for the post, I must remember to check my email more often. --
From mutt in /dev/tty4... João Miguel
2015-11-24 18:42 GMT+01:00 João Miguel <jmcf125@openmailbox.org>:
Boy, I wish I was as cautious as you before updating... I was about to post that after updating nvidia drivers, trying to start the X will get you a black screen. I had assumed it was related to the custom kernel and/or DKMS, but the problem appears with the regular nvidia package and kernel. Well, I guess I can always downgrade.
Thanks for the post, I must remember to check my email more often
Did you update today? Laurent fixed the nvidia package the same day (22 Nov.), which is in [extra] now. There shouldn't be any problems with the current package.
Did you update today? Laurent fixed the nvidia package the same day (22 Nov.), which is in [extra] now. There shouldn't be any problems with the current package. Yes. Rereading this thread, it seems not only hadn't I read the email before I had the problem, I didn't even read it properly afterwards... I thought I might have had those errors and hadn't read them, but upon inspection of /var/log/pacman.log, it turns out there were actually no errors.
Given the case, and since I'm in no emergency (have downgraded the packages, can use the X, although graphical acceleration does not work), I'll make a new thread asking why do I get the problem I described with the most recently packaged kernel and nvidia drivers, searching for it more adequately first. Sorry if I wasted your time, false alarm, I was simply distracted. Twice. João Miguel
Op 24 nov. 2015 18:42 schreef "João Miguel" <jmcf125@openmailbox.org>:
I'm afraid if I'll reboot, there will be problems with the graphics
driver.
Why wasn't the linux package updated alongside these others?
Or am I wrong, and is this harmless? Boy, I wish I was as cautious as you before updating... I was about to post that after updating nvidia drivers, trying to start the X will get you a black screen. I had assumed it was related to the custom kernel and/or DKMS, but the problem appears with the regular nvidia package and kernel. Well, I guess I can always downgrade.
Thanks for the post, I must remember to check my email more often.
Even better: read the pacman messages while updating (or afterwards in the logs). ;) Mvg, Guus
Even better: read the pacman messages while updating (or afterwards in the logs). ;) Turns out I read messages that weren't there... Thought I had missed them when I saw this thread. Which makes my problem as complicated as I thought it was before I found this (i.e. an actual driver problem instead of a packaging mistake).
Thanks for the attention, João Miguel
participants (5)
-
G. Schlisio
-
Guus Snijders
-
João Miguel
-
Laurent Carlier
-
Sebastiaan Lokhorst