| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Frustrated
n00b
Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 74
|
 Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 1:29 pm Post subject: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
 |
|
I followed the handbook to the T. I'm not in front of my computer right now so I will post emerge --info, make.conf, etc. later but I'm looking for some general insight now.
When trying to install from stage 1, I do emerge -e system and I've run into a plethora of problems. Emerge bitches about perl missing, then openssl, then autoconf version, all those errors people have been reporting here before. Now it's bitching about X11-xorg...{version} which I can't find elsewhere here. I think the Gentoo developers should be ashamed. I thought emerge was supposed to figure out these dependancies automatically. Why the hell am I using --nodep on anything? I should be able to do what the handbook says (emerge -e system and the next step is compile the kernel).
I know Linux well but I'm new to Gentoo. Please help:
What exactly does portage and emerge do
Why doesn't emerge -e system work right the way the handbook claims it does.
If I can't get a solution soon, I'm going to literally burn my Gentoo cd and install Debian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
Location: Cluj-Napoca, Romania
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 1:31 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
Why are you using stage 1?
| Frustrated wrote: | | If I can't get a solution soon, I'm going to literally burn my Gentoo cd and install Debian. |
Ah well.
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frustrated
n00b
Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 74
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 1:37 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| moocha wrote: | | Why are you using stage 1? |
Why not? Apparently it works. I got a lot of time on my hands and I'm trying to get the most of Gentoo. If you want me to do stage 3 then I might as well just install Redhat or something.
Yeah, I know you don't care, my point is I don't want to do it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gherald
Veteran
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 1399
Location: CLUAConsole
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 1:39 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| Frustrated wrote: | | moocha wrote: | | Why are you using stage 1? |
Why not? Apparently it works. I got a lot of time on my hands and I'm trying to get the most of Gentoo. If you want me to do stage 3 then I might as well just install Redhat or something. |
Hogwash: Stage 1/3
| Frustrated wrote: |
Yeah, I know you don't care, my point is I don't want to do it. |
Wallow in your ignorance, then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Syntaxis
Guru
Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 511
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 1:47 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| Frustrated wrote: | | I think the Gentoo developers should be ashamed. |
I think the entire tone of your post is way off base. Volunteer developers owe you absolutely nothing. Always remember that they have done you a favour in giving you the fruits of their labours in the first place, and in fixing whatever problems you may have (if indeed this isn't a case of PEBKAC) they will be doing you yet another. There is no excuse for being anything other than courteous in addressing them.
| Quote: | | If I can't get a solution soon, I'm going to literally burn my Gentoo cd and install Debian. |
Why would you think anyone would be moved by such an ultimatum? Preferring Debian over Gentoo is hardly a heinous crime... Besides, judging by your posts in this thread, your absence from the community is hardly going to be a major loss.
_________________
The Debian User Forums - help them grow! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
Location: Cluj-Napoca, Romania
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Do not use stage 1 unless you are absolutely forced to, i.e. if you need to change the CHOST (for example when targetting an i586 architecture). The manual recommends stage 3. You chose to ignore it.
Do not use stage 2, ever, period. The manual recommends stage 3. You chose to ignore it.
Stages 1 and 2 are necessarily and unavoidably broken, suffering from various problems ranging from incomplete /var/db/pkg to circular dependencies in the system metapackage. For stage 1 this can't be avoided (bootstrapping requires various unconventional tricks), and stage 2 is IM(NS)HO utterly pointless and should be just killed off already.
But, again, you chose to ignore the manual's recommendation, then you come here throwing a tantrum. Tsk.
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frustrated
n00b
Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 74
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Do not use stage 1 unless you are absolutely forced to, i.e. if you need to change the CHOST (for example when targetting an i586 architecture). The manual recommends stage 3. You chose to ignore it. |
The manual doesn't recommend any of the three. I looked at the +/- of stage 1 and it suits my desires perfectly. Does stage 3 assume i686 or i386?
| Quote: |
Do not use stage 2, ever, period. The manual recommends stage 3. You chose to ignore it. |
Okay, I won't use stage 2. The manual doesn't recommend stage 3 anywhere that I can find. It only suggests the pros and cons and they seem to match the pros and cons of any other distribution. I want to try something different. See what sets gentoo apart from the rest.
| Quote: |
Stages 1 and 2 are necessarily and unavoidably broken, suffering from various problems ranging from incomplete /var/db/pkg to circular dependencies in the system metapackage. For stage 1 this can't be avoided (bootstrapping requires various unconventional tricks), and stage 2 is IM(NS)HO utterly pointless and should be just killed off already. |
Seems people have been reporting problems with stage 1 and 2 for a while now. If stage 1 is necessarily broken, why doesn't the manual mention this? With workarounds? What causes some people to be affected and others not?
| Quote: |
But, again, you chose to ignore the manual's recommendation, then you come here throwing a tantrum. Tsk. |
Again, I didn't see a recommendation, but anyway. I'm not trying to throw a tantrum here, I'm just looking for answers and solutions. Your post has certainly helped. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
Location: Cluj-Napoca, Romania
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Frustrated wrote: | | I didn't see a recommendation |
| http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=1&chap=2#doc_chap2_sect4 wrote: | | Choosing to go with a stage3 allows for the fastest install of Gentoo Linux, but also means that your base system will have the optimization settings that we chose for you (which to be honest, are good settings and were carefully chosen to enhance performance while maintaining stability). |
Well, I call that a recommendation, especially in corroboration with the mentioning of the rolling updates nature of Gentoo Linux... It's not explicitely spelled out (I'll grant you that), but I think compared to the descriptions of the other two stages it's pretty much a "Pick me!" cry IMO. | Frustrated wrote: | | I'm not trying to throw a tantrum here, I'm just looking for answers and solutions. Your post has certainly helped. |
Sorry, I could've been more supportive too. Got alienated by your initial post.
And yup, I'd love to see the handbook drop stage 2 and explain more thoroughly the disadvantages of stage 1.
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frustrated
n00b
Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 74
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 4:18 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| Syntaxis wrote: | | Frustrated wrote: | | I think the Gentoo developers should be ashamed. |
I think the entire tone of your post is way off base. Volunteer developers owe you absolutely nothing. Always remember that they have done you a favour in giving you the fruits of their labours in the first place, and in fixing whatever problems you may have (if indeed this isn't a case of PEBKAC) they will be doing you yet another. There is no excuse for being anything other than courteous in addressing them. |
Obviously I should qualify that statement some more. I write programs too and I know that if my program compiles but doesn't run, I have failed and it isn't ready to be distributed to anyone. In the same manner, based on the problems I, and so many others are having, it isn't ready for distribution yet. Even if they have no responsibility to me, they should be ashamed of passing off what seems to be a sub par implementation. Or at least not making any mention of the problem as part of a "known bugs" section or something like that is a shameful oversight.
| Quote: |
Why would you think anyone would be moved by such an ultimatum? Preferring Debian over Gentoo is hardly a heinous crime... Besides, judging by your posts in this thread, your absence from the community is hardly going to be a major loss. |
It's not an ultimatum. Just venting my frustration over my gentoo results. I hope I can get a solution soon because I really want to try Gentoo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Syntaxis
Guru
Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 511
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Frustrated wrote: | | Even if they have no responsibility to me, they should be ashamed of passing off what seems to be a sub par implementation. |
Apart from anything else, I see the "public shaming" approach as being rather counterproductive. Besides making it less likely that anyone will listen to you (as the old saying goes, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar), it results in those who make imperfect contributions being unfairly subjected to harsher criticism than those who contribute nothing at all. Thus, it actively encourages hoarding over the open sharing and dissemination of code. The correct (and certainly more productive) attitude is to be grateful that anything has been given at all, and restrict oneself only to constructive criticism.
I also think there's an important distinction between someone being ashamed of themselves and some external party trying to shame them. Similarly, I often speak about myself in a self-deprecating fashion but I'd be hugely offended if the same belittling comments came from someone else's lips.
| Quote: | | Or at least not making any mention of the problem as part of a "known bugs" section or something like that is a shameful oversight. |
Why? Standard practice in Open Source projects is that it falls to those first discovering bugs (generally those being bitten by them) to report them in the BTS, and for people to check the BTS to see what known bugs are present. Anything over and above that is just icing on the cake and far from de rigueur.
Oh, well. We all get a little hot under the collar once in the while, so no harm done.  Good luck with your install.
_________________
The Debian User Forums - help them grow! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyrillic
Watchman
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 7301
Location: Groton, Massachusetts USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| moocha wrote: | | Stages 1 and 2 are necessarily and unavoidably broken, |
Not true. I install from stage1 (and ~x86) on a regular basis without problems.
| moocha wrote: | | suffering from various problems ranging from incomplete /var/db/pkg |
As far as I know, this problem was fixed with the 2005.0 release, but even so, it never really caused any installation difficulties.
| moocha wrote: | | to circular dependencies in the system metapackage. |
This happens when certain USE flags are added before the base installation is done. USE="" or USE="nptl" is all you should have when proceeding from stage1->stage2 and from stage2->stage3.
Once you have a base system that boots on its own, then add more USE flags as desired.
| moocha wrote: | | and stage 2 is IM(NS)HO utterly pointless and should be just killed off already. |
I agree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
Location: Cluj-Napoca, Romania
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I should have nuanced it off a bit - instead of "broken" I should have said "not canonical" or "not quite kosher" or the like . But yes, points well taken.
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gherald
Veteran
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 1399
Location: CLUAConsole
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How about "more prone to failure and without any useful benefit whatsoever" (unless you need to change your CHOST) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
moocha
Watchman
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Posts: 5722
Location: Cluj-Napoca, Romania
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That'd do quite well .
_________________
Military Commissions Act of 2006: http://tinyurl.com/jrcto
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- attributed to Benjamin Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyrillic
Watchman
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 7301
Location: Groton, Massachusetts USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gherald wrote: | | How about "more prone to failure and without any useful benefit whatsoever" (unless you need to change your CHOST) |
When I do a stage1 installation using a stage1 tarball, it is quicker and cleaner than doing a stage1 on 3 installation.
How about that for a "useful benefit"  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gherald
Veteran
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 1399
Location: CLUAConsole
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1) Stage1 is not cleaner.
2) Stage1 is not that much quicker than Stage1/3. But if time is a problem, you should be doing a Stage3 anyway and have your system gradually rebuild itself to an optimized state with future -uD worlds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyrillic
Watchman
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 7301
Location: Groton, Massachusetts USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gherald wrote: | | 1) Stage1 is not cleaner. |
I disagree.
| Gherald wrote: | | 2) Stage1 is not that much quicker than Stage1/3. But if time is a problem, you should be doing a Stage3 anyway and have your system gradually rebuild itself to an optimized state with future -uD worlds. |
I am not in a hurry, but "emerge -e <anything>" is almost always a waste of time. My stage1 install procedure is quicker than stage1/3 by about 2X. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gherald
Veteran
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 1399
Location: CLUAConsole
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyrillic
Watchman
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 7301
Location: Groton, Massachusetts USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am aware that it is in the newer documentation, but I use older installation instructions that actually work.
EDIT : maybe I should file a bug report ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gherald
Veteran
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 1399
Location: CLUAConsole
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 8:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cyrillic wrote: | | I am aware that it is in the newer documentation, but I use older installation instructions that actually work. |
False: the older instalation instructions caused problems for many people.
First you say:
| cyrillic wrote: | | As far as I know, this problem was fixed with the 2005.0 release, but even so, it never really caused any installation difficulties. |
Then you proceed to circumvent one of the steps designed to fix it 
| cyrillic wrote: | | EDIT : maybe I should file a bug report ... |
Yeah, sure, waste people's time... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cyrillic wrote: | | moocha wrote: | | Stages 1 and 2 are necessarily and unavoidably broken, |
Not true. I install from stage1 (and ~x86) on a regular basis without problems. |
i know i'm kind of late in arriving to the party, but i'll throw my two cents in before everyone leaves. 
i've had the same reported problems with circular dependencies and incomplete /var/db/pkg with Stage 1 installs, and Bootstrapping into the testing branch has never been a picnic. these problems are why i developed the Stage 1/3 install in the first place.
| Quote: | | moocha wrote: | | suffering from various problems ranging from incomplete /var/db/pkg |
As far as I know, this problem was fixed with the 2005.0 release, but even so, it never really caused any installation difficulties. |
my experience has also been that an incomplete /var/db/pkg doesn't cause installation difficulties, but it definitely causes its fair share of maintenance difficulties, and then some. one side-effect of having an incomplete /var/db/pkg is that causes problems that can be exceptionally difficult to track down. i would wager that most people that have problems attributable to the incomplete /var/db/pkg have never successfully elucidated the nature of their problems.
| Quote: | | moocha wrote: | | to circular dependencies in the system metapackage. |
This happens when certain USE flags are added before the base installation is done. USE="" or USE="nptl" is all you should have when proceeding from stage1->stage2 and from stage2->stage3.
Once you have a base system that boots on its own, then add more USE flags as desired. |
that is an exceptionally good point that bears repeating. i have had far too many "experienced" gentoo users ask me why i don't add additional USE flags during the initial system build. it seems that a large number of "seasoned" gentoo users don't fully appreciate the importance of building the toolkit on its own, and then building/populating the world files. these are two separate steps, and its much better for your system to address each step separately.
| Quote: | | moocha wrote: | | and stage 2 is IM(NS)HO utterly pointless and should be just killed off already. |
I agree. |
me too!
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cyrillic wrote: | | Gherald wrote: | | How about "more prone to failure and without any useful benefit whatsoever" (unless you need to change your CHOST) |
When I do a stage1 installation using a stage1 tarball, it is quicker and cleaner than doing a stage1 on 3 installation.
How about that for a "useful benefit" |
hehe. nobody ever said that a Stage 1/3 was fast! 
| Stage 1/3 Installation Guide wrote: | | WARNING: This is an ADVANCED installation method. The amount of time required for you to complete this type of installation will equal or exceed that of any other Gentoo installation method. Your time will be well invested, though, as the result will be a very stable Gentoo system. This installation method may prove to be somewhat difficult and cumbersome for users who are new to Gentoo. It will prove especially painful for users who plan to install Gentoo old hardware. |
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 9:28 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| Frustrated wrote: | I followed the handbook to the T. I'm not in front of my computer right now so I will post emerge --info, make.conf, etc. later but I'm looking for some general insight now.
When trying to install from stage 1, I do emerge -e system and I've run into a plethora of problems. |
getting back to the original topic, where do you find instructions to perform an emerge -e system during a stage 1 install? IIRC the required command is emerge system, not emerge -e system. the difference is significant. 
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gherald
Veteran
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 1399
Location: CLUAConsole
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 9:33 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| Bob P wrote: | | Frustrated wrote: | I followed the handbook to the T. I'm not in front of my computer right now so I will post emerge --info, make.conf, etc. later but I'm looking for some general insight now.
When trying to install from stage 1, I do emerge -e system and I've run into a plethora of problems. |
getting back to the original topic, where do you find instructions to perform an emerge -e system during a stage 1 install? IIRC the required command is emerge system, not emerge -e system. the difference is significant. |
When trying to install from stage 1 -- and after completing stage 1 and proceeding to stage 2 -- the Gentoo docs say to emerge -e system. I linked to this 2 posts ago... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyrillic
Watchman
Joined: 19 Feb 2003
Posts: 7301
Location: Groton, Massachusetts USA
|
| Posted: Thu May 19, 2005 11:50 pm Post subject: Re: What's wrong with emerge -e system? |
|
|
| Bob P wrote: | | where do you find instructions to perform an emerge -e system during a stage 1 install? IIRC the required command is emerge system, not emerge -e system. the difference is significant. |
It also apears on the screen when bootstrap completes.
| bootstrap.sh wrote: | echo -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
einfo "Please note that you should now add the '-e' option for emerge system:"
echo
einfo " # emerge -e system"
echo |
But I think the correct command should be "emerge system" like in the old days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Installing Gentoo
