[pacman-dev] (Most likely) final RC before going to testing
This RC fixes the way conflicts and backups are handled. It should work correctly and more efficiently. In addition, backups are proactive. That is, adding backup=() to a package does not require a full release cycle to take effect. In addition, this RC passes all pactest tests (it seems I forgot pactest existed, heh). All major bugs should be closed, and everything should work correctly. The bug catcher is here: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/6316 The only remain items are rebuilding the developer tools and official repo scripts to use the new tools. In all honesty, that should be quick, and isn't required until we go live. So, test this out. Let me know if there's any issues: http://archlinux.org/~aaron/pacman/pacman-rc-2007.02.21-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz For those who don't know, this package installs side-by-side with the current pacman. All commands, configs, and man pages are renamed with '3' appended (pacman3, makepkg3, /etc/pacman3.conf). When this goes to testing, this will NOT be the case. Enjoy, Aaron
On 2/21/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
This RC fixes the way conflicts and backups are handled. It should work correctly and more efficiently. In addition, backups are proactive. That is, adding backup=() to a package does not require a full release cycle to take effect.
In addition, this RC passes all pactest tests (it seems I forgot pactest existed, heh).
All major bugs should be closed, and everything should work correctly.
The bug catcher is here: http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/6316
The only remain items are rebuilding the developer tools and official repo scripts to use the new tools. In all honesty, that should be quick, and isn't required until we go live.
So, test this out. Let me know if there's any issues: http://archlinux.org/~aaron/pacman/pacman-rc-2007.02.21-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz
For those who don't know, this package installs side-by-side with the current pacman. All commands, configs, and man pages are renamed with '3' appended (pacman3, makepkg3, /etc/pacman3.conf). When this goes to testing, this will NOT be the case.
Enjoy, Aaron
Ok, there was a CVS commit in there as I was writing this email. The package has been rebuilt and reuploaded, so make sure you get it after THIS email is sent. I doubt anyone was fast enough to get the install in that time.
I think thjere is a typo in the pkgbuild: install -m644 -D $startdir/src/pacman-lib/contrib/bash_completion \ $startdir/pkg/etc/bach_completion.d/pacman should be bash and not bach -- http://www.archlinux.de
On 2/21/07, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
I think thjere is a typo in the pkgbuild:
install -m644 -D $startdir/src/pacman-lib/contrib/bash_completion \ $startdir/pkg/etc/bach_completion.d/pacman
should be bash and not bach
Well damn, i didn't actually mean to keep those in there. Must have overlooked them. Please upgrade/use this package, as it doesn't add the completion stuff (yet): http://archlinux.org/~aaron/pacman/pacman-rc-2007.02.21-2-i686.pkg.tar.gz
One more thing. Here is a list of remaining "bugs" assigned to pacman: http://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?project=1&type=1&cat=6 All of these we have currently deemed non-critical to the release, but if you disagree, please bring it up. Also, if you find any that are closable, that's great too.
On 2/21/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
One more thing. Here is a list of remaining "bugs" assigned to pacman: http://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?project=1&type=1&cat=6
All of these we have currently deemed non-critical to the release, but if you disagree, please bring it up. Also, if you find any that are closable, that's great too.
<http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/6465> Not critical, but my take on it is there. -Dan
On 02:37 Wed 21 Feb , Aaron Griffin wrote:
So, test this out. Let me know if there's any issues: http://archlinux.org/~aaron/pacman/pacman-rc-2007.02.21-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz
This looks odd: ----------------------8<-----------------------------------8<---------- sudo pacman3 -U ~/packages/ncmpc-svn-5200-2-i686.pkg.tar.gz loading package data... done. checking dependencies... :: ncmpc-svn conflicts with ncmpc. Remove ncmpc? [Y/n] y done. cleaning up... done. (1/1) checking for file conflicts [-------------------------------------------------------------] 100% Internal pacman error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with the given package if appropriate. ----------------------8<-----------------------------------8<---------- this is the package ncmpc-svn: http://themolok.netsons.org/uploads/ncmpc-svn-5200-2-i686.pkg.tar.gz the other package (ncmpc) is in [extra] Do you need other infos ? -- Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino Arch Linux Trusted User http://www.archlinux.org
Fixed the segfault below. New package is here: http://archlinux.org/~aaron/pacman/pacman-rc-2007.02.22-1-i686.pkg.tar.gz On 2/21/07, Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino <themolok.ml@gmail.com> wrote:
sudo pacman3 -U ~/packages/ncmpc-svn-5200-2-i686.pkg.tar.gz ... Internal pacman error: Segmentation fault Please submit a full bug report, with the given package if appropriate.
Well, this is fixed, but not in the way it should be. The actual error is related to http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/3492 and is a complicated fix. For right now, I'm reporting an error due to: a) the difficulty in fixing that *correctly* b) the fact that it is an edge case, an operation typically done with -S Here is my output (trimmed for email purposes): $ sudo pacman3 -U ncmpc-svn-5200-2-i686.pkg.tar.gz ncmpc-svn 79.6K 112.7K/s 00:00:01 [###########] 100% loading package data... done. checking dependencies... error: replacing packages with -A and -U is not supported yet error: please remove 'ncmpc' first, using -Rd error: failed to prepare transaction (conflicting dependencies) While it's not the best solution, it will work for the time being.
On 02:37 Wed 21 Feb , Aaron Griffin wrote:
[...] So, test this out. Let me know if there's any issues:
When I'm doing a system upgrade or installing a package and i run makepkg3, it complains for pacman already running and tell that can not do the dependency check or so. Is this a bug or an intended behaviour? -- Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino Arch Linux Trusted User http://www.archlinux.org
When I'm doing a system upgrade or installing a package and i run makepkg3, it complains for pacman already running and tell that can not do the dependency check or so. Is this a bug or an intended behaviour?
Could you tell us what makepkg3's output was because I think stonecrest mentioned this on IRC and knowing if it is the same thing would be helpful. ~ Jamie / yankees26
On 08:59 Sun 25 Feb , James Rosten wrote:
When I'm doing a system upgrade or installing a package and i run makepkg3, it complains for pacman already running and tell that can not do the dependency check or so. Is this a bug or an intended behaviour?
Could you tell us what makepkg3's output was because I think stonecrest mentioned this on IRC and knowing if it is the same thing would be helpful.
here it is: (12000)$> makepkg3 ==> Entering fakeroot environment ==> Making package: gpomme 1.1-3 (Sun Feb 25 16:34:25 CET 2007) ==> Checking Runtime Dependencies... error: unable to lock database ==> ERROR: pacman3 returned a fatal error (1): if you're sure a package manager is not already running, you can remove /tmp/pacman.lck ==> Checking Buildtime Dependencies... ==> Retrieving Sources... -> Found gpomme-1.1.tar.gz in build dir ==> Validating source files with md5sums gpomme-1.1.tar.gz ... Passed ==> WARNING: Integrity checks (sha1) are missing or incomplete. ==> Extracting Sources... -> tar -xf gpomme-1.1.tar.gz ==> Removing existing pkg/ directory... [...] -- Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino Arch Linux Trusted User http://www.archlinux.org
On 2/25/07, Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino <themolok.ml@gmail.com> wrote:
On 08:59 Sun 25 Feb , James Rosten wrote:
When I'm doing a system upgrade or installing a package and i run makepkg3, it complains for pacman already running and tell that can not do the dependency check or so. Is this a bug or an intended behaviour?
Could you tell us what makepkg3's output was because I think stonecrest mentioned this on IRC and knowing if it is the same thing would be helpful.
here it is:
(12000)$> makepkg3 ==> Entering fakeroot environment ==> Making package: gpomme 1.1-3 (Sun Feb 25 16:34:25 CET 2007) ==> Checking Runtime Dependencies... error: unable to lock database ==> ERROR: pacman3 returned a fatal error (1): if you're sure a package manager is not already running, you can remove /tmp/pacman.lck ==> Checking Buildtime Dependencies... ==> Retrieving Sources... -> Found gpomme-1.1.tar.gz in build dir ==> Validating source files with md5sums gpomme-1.1.tar.gz ... Passed ==> WARNING: Integrity checks (sha1) are missing or incomplete. ==> Extracting Sources... -> tar -xf gpomme-1.1.tar.gz ==> Removing existing pkg/ directory... [...]
Did you try doing another pacman operation that locks the DB right after? That would have likely failed too. If you read the message, it indicates that the lock file exists, which happens if pacman is running an operation that requires a locked DB. Try following the instructions given- if you are sure pacman is not running, remove the lock file. If you can duplicate this bug after trying that, be sure to give the exact steps leading up to it. -Dan
On 11:34 Sun 25 Feb , Dan McGee wrote:
On 2/25/07, Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino <themolok.ml@gmail.com> wrote:
On 08:59 Sun 25 Feb , James Rosten wrote:
When I'm doing a system upgrade or installing a package and i run makepkg3, it complains for pacman already running and tell that can not do the dependency check or so. Is this a bug or an intended behaviour?
Could you tell us what makepkg3's output was because I think stonecrest mentioned this on IRC and knowing if it is the same thing would be helpful.
here it is:
(12000)$> makepkg3 ==> Entering fakeroot environment ==> Making package: gpomme 1.1-3 (Sun Feb 25 16:34:25 CET 2007) ==> Checking Runtime Dependencies... error: unable to lock database ==> ERRORe: pacman3 returned a fatal error (1): if you're sure a package manager is not already running, you can remove /tmp/pacman.lck ==> Checking Buildtime Dependencies... ==> Retrieving Sources... -> Found gpomme-1.1.tar.gz in build dir ==> Validating source files with md5sums gpomme-1.1.tar.gz ... Passed ==> WARNING: Integrity checks (sha1) are missing or incomplete. ==> Extracting Sources... -> tar -xf gpomme-1.1.tar.gz ==> Removing existing pkg/ directory... [...]
Did you try doing another pacman operation that locks the DB right after? That would have likely failed too.
Of course it does.
If you read the message, it indicates that the lock file exists, which happens if pacman is running an operation that requires a locked DB. Try following the instructions given- if you are sure pacman is not running, remove the lock file.
Indeed pacman was running. I got that output while pacman was running, but I think that an operation like dependency check that only reads the db should be allowed. Maybe it's a design choice for pacman3, because pacman2 doesn't complain for it. (Now Andreas Radke opened a thread for this behaviour) -- Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino Arch Linux Trusted User http://www.archlinux.org
participants (5)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Alessio 'mOLOk' Bolognino
-
Dan McGee
-
James Rosten
-
Pierre Schmitz