View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Roc n00b
Joined: 19 Jul 2002 Posts: 35
|
Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2002 10:54 pm Post subject: Why is openldap-2.0.27 masked under Gentoo 1.2? |
|
|
I run a production server with Gentoo 1.2 (will not update it to 1.4 unless it's necessary). When I try to emerge openldap cause of the recent security update, it shows me 2.0.25-r2 as the latest version. On a Gentoo 1.4 system (e.g. my desktop machine) 2.0.27 is the latest as it should be. Is this a bug or is there a reason for being masked under 1.2? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
474 l33t
Joined: 19 Apr 2002 Posts: 714
|
Posted: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | will not update it to 1.4 unless it's necessary | I presume your comment is because you're using a gcc-2.9.5 compiled system and /etc/make.profile is symlinked to /usr/portage/profiles/default-1.0 instead of /usr/portage/profiles/default-x86-1.4. Check. Even so, it shouldn't be masked. However, I checked /usr/portage/profiles/default-1.0/packages and saw: Code: | >=net-nds/openldap-1.2.12-r6
<net-nds/openldap-2.0.27 |
This seems contradictory to me. The second line makes sense, but the one above it does not. Try removing it or even both - openldap is not listed at all in the packages file for the "1.4" profile.
Hopefully that will have some effect - if it solves the problem then file it on bugzilla. If all else fails just force the build: Code: | cd /usr/portage/net-nds/openldap
ebuild openldap-2.0.27.ebuild fetch
ebuild openldap-2.0.27.ebuild unpack
ebuild openldap-2.0.27.ebuild compile
ebuild openldap-2.0.27.ebuild install
ebuild openldap-2.0.27.ebuild qmerge |
To be honest, if you want a gcc-2.9.5 production system, Gentoo may not have been a good choice because development efforts are no doubt rallying behind gcc-3.x and the 1.4 profile. I suspect the old profile will be phased out, especially with the forthcoming release which, let's not forget, is the first "proper" non-beta, non-rc Gentoo release. I run a server with the 1.4 profile and gcc-3.2.1 and have no complaints. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Roc n00b
Joined: 19 Jul 2002 Posts: 35
|
Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2003 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | To be honest, if you want a gcc-2.9.5 production system, Gentoo may not have been a good choice because development efforts are no doubt rallying behind gcc-3.x and the 1.4 profile. I suspect the old profile will be phased out, especially with the forthcoming release which, let's not forget, is the first "proper" non-beta, non-rc Gentoo release. I run a server with the 1.4 profile and gcc-3.2.1 and have no complaints. |
At the time I installed the server, 1.4rc1 was not available. Also I need a stable system - and 1.2 runs very stable - cause the machine is located in a data center away from my hometown, and, I only have ssh access to it. I will do an update at some point in the future, but this must not break the machine. It would be nice, that even older profiles are supported. Doing experiments with a production machine is what I (and surely some other people) want to avoid. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
474 l33t
Joined: 19 Apr 2002 Posts: 714
|
Posted: Thu Jan 02, 2003 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK, but did you get openldap merged |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Roc n00b
Joined: 19 Jul 2002 Posts: 35
|
Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2003 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | OK, but did you get openldap merged |
Yes, I emerged it manually and it seems to work. But of course, portage wants me to downgrade it everytime I do emerge -pu system. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
474 l33t
Joined: 19 Apr 2002 Posts: 714
|
Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2003 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Report it. But in the interim, you could always explicitly mask older versions. Something like: Code: | <openldap-2.0.27-r1 |
should do the trick, as long as that's the only line in the file. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|