| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cwc
Veteran
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1281
Location: Tri-Cities, WA USA
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:57 am Post subject: Starting next week, new stages will have make.conf and make. |
 |
|
| Code: |
Starting next week, new stages will have make.conf and make.profile
moved from /etc to /etc/portage. This is a change in the installation
defaults, that will only affect new installs so it doesn't affect
current systems.
Current users don't need to do anything. But if you want to follow the
preferred location, you may want to take the chance to move the files
in your system(s) to the new location.
|
I just want to make sure . All I need to do is move make.conf and make.profile to /etc/portage ?
In my case I have a /etc/make.profile/ directory and I'm assuming this entire directory will get moved.
In my case I've put package.keywords package.mask package.use . . . in folders
azzerare portage # ls -l
total 52
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jun 6 05:17 bin
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10 Aug 25 12:27 categories
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Aug 25 12:35 env
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 103 Dec 26 2010 package.accept_keywords
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 25 13:11 package.env
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 25 13:11 package.keywords
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 73 May 13 2011 package.license
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 Nov 6 2010 package.local
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 25 12:34 package.mask
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 46 Aug 26 06:44 package.unmask
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Aug 25 13:43 package.use
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Jun 6 05:17 postsync.d
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 Aug 25 12:35 profile
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Oct 21 2010 savedconfig
_________________
Without diversity there can be no evolution:) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aCOSwt
Bodhisattva
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:49 pm Post subject: Re: Starting next week, new stages will have make.conf and m |
|
|
| cwc wrote: | | Code: |
Starting next week, new stages will have make.conf and make.profile
moved from /etc to /etc/portage. This is a change in the installation
defaults, that will only affect new installs so it doesn't affect
current systems.
Current users don't need to do anything. But if you want to follow the
preferred location, you may want to take the chance to move the files
in your system(s) to the new location.
|
I just want to make sure . All I need to do is move make.conf and make.profile to /etc/portage ? |
| Quote: | | Current users don't need to do anything |
I keep wondering how one could have made things simpler than that and why we definitely want them to be more complicated.
So , no, all you need to do is not to move whatever wherever. All you need to do is : Nothing ! 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54208
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cwc,
/etc/make.profile is a symbolic link. Be careful how you move it.
Just now, do nothing as not all of the tools will have caught up.
To be safe, you need to be somewhere between first into the future and last out of the past :)
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aCOSwt
Bodhisattva
Joined: 19 Oct 2007
Posts: 2537
Location: Hilbert space
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NeddySeagoon wrote: | To be safe, you need to be somewhere between first into the future and last out of the past  |
And if the past is "do nothing" and the future is "do nothing", how do you make the distinction between both ? 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cwc
Veteran
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Posts: 1281
Location: Tri-Cities, WA USA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| NeddySeagoon wrote: | cwc,
/etc/make.profile is a symbolic link. Be careful how you move it.
Just now, do nothing as not all of the tools will have caught up.
To be safe, you need to be somewhere between first into the future and last out of the past |
Thank you for your kind words Neddy. I like the quote.
It's good to know this is the beginning of the cycle.
_________________
Without diversity there can be no evolution:) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dataking
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 251
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
The quote in the OP stated that it would affect new installs only.
_________________
-= the D@7@k|n& =- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BillWho
Veteran
Joined: 03 Mar 2012
Posts: 1600
Location: US
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
cwc,
I moved make.conf to /etc/portage and symlinked it in /etc for the time being. make.profile is now a symlink in /etc and /etc/portage.
Everything seems to be working fine so far
_________________
Good luck 
Since installing gentoo, my life has become one long emerge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54208
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BillWho,
Both everything in /etc and everything in /etc/portage seems to work.
I'm migrating as I do my monthly update or a majour change.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unknown2
n00b
Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 29
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
There is two file/symlink left, will they be moved to /etc/portage too?
$ ls -la /etc/make*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 539 May 10 15:16 /etc/make.conf.catalyst
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40 Aug 12 08:52 /etc/make.globals -> ../usr/share/portage/config/make.globals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BillWho
Veteran
Joined: 03 Mar 2012
Posts: 1600
Location: US
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
unknown2,
This is what I get:
| Code: | laptop etc # ls -la /etc/make*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 539 Jun 21 03:12 /etc/make.conf.catalyst
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1192 Aug 26 23:06 /etc/make.conf~
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40 Aug 9 22:35 /etc/make.globals -> ../usr/share/portage/config/make.globals
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 56 Jul 27 21:07 /etc/make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0/desktop/
|
There was no mention of moving make.conf.catalyst and make.globals to /etc/portage.
Also, I recently removed the symlink in /etc for make.conf as I read in another thread - that I can't find now - that it really shouldn't be done. It could cause a double read of the config file
_________________
Good luck
Since installing gentoo, my life has become one long emerge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simonbcn
n00b
Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 69
Location: Denmark
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BillWho wrote: | | There was no mention of moving make.conf.catalyst and make.globals to /etc/portage. |
Same question, why don't move these files too? They have the same finality: portage, no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimmie
Guru
Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 531
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aCOSwt wrote: | | And if the past is "do nothing" and the future is "do nothing", how do you make the distinction between both ? |
I guess you'll just have to do everything in the present? Wait.... no. Yes. But. What?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unknown2
n00b
Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 29
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| simonbcn wrote: | | BillWho wrote: | | There was no mention of moving make.conf.catalyst and make.globals to /etc/portage. |
Same question, why don't move these files too? They have the same finality: portage, no? |
i found out that "make.globals" is installed by the portage ebuild, i guess it will be handled in future version of portage
but for "make.conf.catalyst", i have no idea, what is the purpose of this file anyway?
$ equery belongs -e /etc/make.globals
* Searching for /etc/make.globals ...
sys-apps/portage-2.1.11.9 (/etc/make.globals -> ../usr/share/portage/config/make.globals)
$ equery belongs -e /etc/make.conf.catalyst
* Searching for /etc/make.conf.catalyst ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Please understand, the future isn't what it used to be :)
Anyhow, afaik, /etc/make.globals (sym-link) is nolonger in use, I believe that anything that uses it now goes streight to /usr/share/portage/config/make.globals.
As for make.conf.catalyst I have no idea of the status, I imagine a warning will be issued via postinst() if and when the file is to be relocated.
At the time (yes, in the past no less) when the move was in its infancy I moved eveything to /etc/portage (sans make.conf.catalyst which I don't have) and noticed no ill effects. I believe that one or two tools may still expect make.conf in /etc ... I think ufed is one case in point, but this is quite an easy fix (should you care to), otherwise a sym-link will sufice.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thistled
Guru
Joined: 06 Jan 2011
Posts: 572
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have just moved /etc/make.conf to /etc/portage/ and it now looks like I can't
compile anything.
The packages go through the motions, and then portage borks.
I have seen g_mutex errors in gmodules, or something like that.
I was wondering if it was because I have moved make.conf, or could it be because I updated to the stable GCC-4.5.4 last night?
| Code: | CCLD libgdmcommon.la
CCLD gdm-crash-logger
CCLD test-settings-client
CCLD test-settings-server
CCLD test-log
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_rec_mutex_lock'
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_rec_mutex_unlock'
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_private_replace'
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_private_get'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_rec_mutex_lock'
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_rec_mutex_unlock'
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_private_replace'
/usr/lib/libgmodule-2.0.so.0: undefined reference to `g_private_get'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[3]: *** [test-settings-client] Error 1
make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make[3]: *** [test-settings-server] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-base/gdm-3.4.1-r1/work/gdm-3.4.1/common'
make[2]: *** [all] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-base/gdm-3.4.1-r1/work/gdm-3.4.1/common'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-base/gdm-3.4.1-r1/work/gdm-3.4.1'
make: *** [all] Error 2
* ERROR: gnome-base/gdm-3.4.1-r1 failed (compile phase):
* emake failed
|
_________________
Whatever you do, do it properly! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thistled
Guru
Joined: 06 Jan 2011
Posts: 572
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
** UPDATE **
It seems I am unable to compile packages with the latest stable gcc-4.5.4 regardless of the new location of /etc/make.conf
The package I used as a test to see if I could compile when switching between gcc was gdm.
As I am running ~arch the latest gdm is ~, so I was wondering if that is why it would not compile.
Should I move up to an ~ version of GCC, and will that compile successfully?
The price one pays for running a mixed stable and ~.
_________________
Whatever you do, do it properly! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Veldrin
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 1945
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
open another thread, as your issue seems unrelated to this topic.
_________________
read the portage output!
If my answer is too concise, ask for an explanation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thistled
Guru
Joined: 06 Jan 2011
Posts: 572
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You're right Veldrin, it is, but my initial enquiry was with regards to moving the make.conf file.
Seems my system does not like the latest stable GCC so please ignore my posts.
Thanks.
_________________
Whatever you do, do it properly! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9521
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
For reference:
- /etc/make.conf.catalyst isn't used by portage (don't know if it's actually used by anything or just exists for documentation purposes), so wether you do/do not move/remove it is irrelevant for portage
- /etc/make.globals has been a compat symlink for ages, it should be ok to be removed, worst case is that outdated third party tools may break.
- having make.conf / make.profile in both /etc and /etc/portage can cause trouble, esp. if the contents differ as portage will check and possibly read both locations which can cause unexpected results. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Genone wrote: | | - having make.conf / make.profile in both /etc and /etc/portage can cause trouble, esp. if the contents differ as portage will check and possibly read both locations which can cause unexpected results. |
Actually that's a wonderful feature and it's no more dangerous than others tools (--depclean...)
/etc/portage/make.conf overwrite /etc/make.conf settings.
i use it as /etc/portage/make.conf is a symlink to my server and if my server cannot provide the file, the default /etc/make.conf is use.
per example my /etc/portage/make.conf have FEATURES="distcc" MAKEOPTS="-j16" SYNC="myserver/gentoo-portage" while /etc/make.conf have them set to a default rsync server, no distcc and fewer makeopts
And if i set in /etc/portage/make.conf a use flag, all my hosts will apply it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9521
Location: beyond the rim
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, looks like he try to resolve same problem as me with a diff solve.
When portage see /etc/portage/make.conf is a dead symlink, it just ignore it and so only /etc/make.conf is applied.
The extra goodies is that it also work for package.mask/unmask/keywords... too |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chiitoo
Administrator
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 2569
Location: Here and Away Again
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 4:26 pm Post subject: ><)))°€ |
|
|
Heh, not that I'm against change (okay maybe I am a wee bit), but as I just recently installed Gentoo in an an old not-so-much-of-a-powerhouse-laptop (mainly just to see what I can do with it, and how much I remember/know what to do without the Handbook after two years, and to compare boot-up times (Windows XP: 7-15 minutes, or 2 hours or more until usable depending on updates, Linux Mint: about 1 minute 30 seconds, Gentoo: about 30 seconds), but I digress), I decided to make /etc/make.conf a symbolic link, pointing to the new location.
I'm not sure why I did it since I know the old location still works... perhaps just to go by the Handbook, but still be able to later on use the old location without making things confusing with two actual files. Or perhaps just to see if something breaks that way or not (the make.conf also go the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 treatment).
It also allows ufed to work properly, which is a positive, methinks. ^^
_________________
Kindest of regardses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sl70
Guru
Joined: 18 Jun 2002
Posts: 449
Location: Saitama, JP
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is not working for me. A few days ago I did emerge --depclean and also updated portage to 2.1.11.31 from 2.1.11.9. Not sure what the cause was now I'm getting all kinds of weird messages. First it said it couldn't parse /etc/portage/make.profile/parent. That seems to make sense since this is what's in that file:
| Code: | ..
../../../../releases/10.0
|
to wit, the file in 3 directories down from / but the path in the file is trying to go up 4 directory levels. I edited it by hand to put /usr/portage/profiles/releases/10.0 in there instead. That stopped the error message but now I'm getting different messages. E.g.,
| Code: | emerge -pvuDN world
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=app-text/poppler-0.12.3-r3[utils]" have been masked.
!!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:
- app-text/poppler-0.20.5::gentoo (masked by: missing keyword, invalid: DEPEND: USE flag 'userland_GNU' referenced in conditional 'userland_GNU?' is not in IUSE)
- app-text/poppler-0.20.4::gentoo (masked by: missing keyword, invalid: DEPEND: USE flag 'userland_GNU' referenced in conditional 'userland_GNU?' is not in IUSE)
- app-text/poppler-0.18.4-r2::gentoo (masked by: missing keyword, invalid: DEPEND: USE flag 'userland_GNU' referenced in conditional 'userland_GNU?' is not in IUSE)
|
That seems to indicate to me that the profile is messed up. But when I try to set the profile I get this:
| Code: |
eselect profile set 3
!!! Warning: Both /etc/make.profile and /etc/portage/make.profile exist.
!!! Warning: Using /etc/make.profile for now.
!!! Error: /etc/make.profile exists but is not a symlink
exiting
|
Right. /etc/make.profile is not a symlink. It's a regular directory. Should it be a symlink? If so, to what?
Any help would be appreciated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chiitoo
Administrator
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 2569
Location: Here and Away Again
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
sl70,
The file determines your profile, so it should point to the profile files, e.g.:
| Code: | $ ls -l /etc/make.profile
/etc/make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/amd64/10.0 |
I've been using portage-2.2~ for a long time, so I don't know if your portage update could have done that (it certainly has not for me). Have you got any idea who or what created it in the new location? Referring to the news item(s), it should only affect new installs, and as mentioned, the old location should work just as well, so it's really up to you to decide which one to keep, I guess.
I'm unsure what would be the best way to go in your situation, but I guess I would try removing it from the old location, and only use the new, if nothing depends on the old location (like ufed depends (or depended) on /etc/make.conf as seen above).
As for handling the file(s), the guide for manually changing profiles might give some good pointers on the where, how, and whats. Not to make you worried, but it does mention performing a neat voodoo dance, so do tread carefully! (I merely jest; that is for manually changing profile and such, which you are not trying to do, but it does mention it, and might help on figuring out something, methinks.)
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml
_________________
Kindest of regardses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
