| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 4:35 am Post subject: Re: stage1-3 on an athlon-tbird |
 |
|
| bad ash wrote: | ...it worked fantastic. I had installed a generic i686 stage 3 install on this box a year or so ago and the stage1-3 version is noticably faster. Like twice as fast!
Mere words cannot express how pleased I am, so I contributed some bling to the Jackass project.
My deepest and most heartfelt thanks to Bob P and everyone else who worked on this. |
Thanks Nathan. 
_________________
.
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: Tue Jan 17, 2006 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grx wrote: | Just a word of warning about using etc-update with this install method:
updating the /etc/udev/udev.conf and /etc/udev/rules.d/50-rules.udev files screwed up my wireless networking with anything beyond udev-070-r1. (I upgraded to 073 because I found 070-r1 had issues with usb flash drives.) There seems to be some difference between these files from the stage 3 tarball and the ones that would be installed with a regular emerge udev. If you try using the udev versions of the files, make a copy of the old ones first so that you can go back if something breaks. (See http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-423727-highlight-.html |
well, you can't blame the Guide if your udev configuration files are different in the tarballs than they are in the latest version of udev in the portage tree. what you're observing has nothing to do with the Guide -- what you're observing is an update to the udev ebuild that has rendered the old version on the Gentoo installation media obsolete. if you try to pin any blame on the Guide, then you're really barking up the wrong tree.
in regard to your question about what config files to update: when it comes to manually updating files, don't do any config file updates until you've finished rebuilding the toolkit. if you want to run etc-update or dispatch-conf, do it after the toolkit is built but before you populate all of your world packages. if you run etc-update many of them will be updated automatically. those files that get updated automatically are files you don't have to worry about. its safe to update any files that you did not edit during the install. if you edited a file during the install, DO NOT allow that file to be overwritten, or you could really bork your system, like Jorge said.
edit: corrected spelling of Jorge's name 
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks
Last edited by Bob P on Fri Jan 20, 2006 2:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grx
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 173
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | if you try to pin any blame on the Guide, then you're really barking up the wrong tree. |
Bob, I'm certainly not saying it's the guide's fault---I merely thought that it might be useful to mention that people might be tempted to run etc-update like portage asks them to after the install. Granted, my udev version is not the same as what would be installed if you run the guide verbatim. On the other hand, the point of the guide is to get a stable, working system. Some things that happen by default do not create the stability and usefulness we're after. A good example is the goofy problem with flash drives using udev-070-r1. To get this ability, we're forced to deviate a little bit from your guide.
I did wait until the toolkit had been rebuilt before running etc-update. In fact, I'd been using the system for a few weeks before taking the time to update the config files. I figured it wouldn't exactly be wise to change the installation steps that much, and that later I could compare the old config's to the new ones.
As for being safe to update anything I didn't edit during the install, the udev conf files weren't touched at all.
| Quote: | | The first thing one should do, is not to run etc-update blindly! |
jmbsvicetto, I certainly didn't do it blindly! Sorry to make it seem as though I had. I examined each one carefully using xdiff, but the differences in the udev files didn't seem to me (at the time) to cause any problems. I hadn't changed anything, so I naively assumed the default with udev-073 would work the same way. Apparantly there are some important changes, and I'll have to examine the files more closely to learn what's causing the problem.
Sorry to make it sound like I was trying to point out a flaw in the guide in anyway. I merely wanted to make sure others don't use etc-update the way I did--even trying to be careful with it you can make a mistake. dispatch-conf sounds interesting, I'll have to look into that.
All in all, Bob, I really like your guide a lot! I can't tell you how much I've learned by using it and tweaking it bit by bit. I can definitely vouch for its stability if you follow it, and the risk you take by deviating from it. It's great work, and I'll be glad to smooth out the few things left I don't quite understand! (I'd still like to understand the FEATURES variable, for example.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
etc-update can be a very dangerous tool. i'm not ashamed to admit that i annihilated my first Gentoo install by using etc-update. early on, i had to learn by my misteaks, just like everyone else.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grx
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 173
Location: Maryland
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can see why now.  Irony would have it that udev-079 is stable now. Everything works fine with the stage config files, but now I've got 20-something files to look at after just having done the update.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zecora
l33t
Joined: 17 Aug 2004
Posts: 627
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am getting this error
| Code: |
Extracting find2perl (with variable substitutions)
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/perl-5.8.7-r3/work/perl-5.8.7/x2p'
Making B (dynamic)
opendir(./../../../../../../../..): Permission denied at ../../lib/File/Find.pm line 598
Use of chdir('') or chdir(undef) as chdir() is deprecated at ../../lib/File/Find.pm line 742.
opendir(/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.6/../../../../..): Permission denied at ../../lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm line 165
opendir(/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/../../../..): Permission denied at ../../lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm line 165
opendir(/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.6/../../../../..): Permission denied at ../../lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm line 165
opendir(/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/../../../..): Permission denied at ../../lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm line 165
opendir(./../../../..): Permission denied at ../../lib/ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm line 165
Couldn't change to directory /var/tmp/portage/homedir/C: No such file or directory at Makefile.PL line 18
Writing Makefile for B
Warning: No Makefile!
make[1]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/perl-5.8.7-r3/work/perl-5.8.7/ext/B'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `config'. Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/perl-5.8.7-r3/work/perl-5.8.7/ext/B'
make config failed, continuing anyway...
make[1]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/perl-5.8.7-r3/work/perl-5.8.7/ext/B'
make[1]: *** No rule to make target `all'. Stop.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/perl-5.8.7-r3/work/perl-5.8.7/ext/B'
make: *** [lib/auto/B/B.so] Error 2
!!! ERROR: dev-lang/perl-5.8.7-r3 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 268, Exitcode 2
!!! Unable to make
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message. |
What info do you guys need and have you seen this error before? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jmbsvicetto
Moderator
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 4725
Location: Angra do Heroísmo (PT)
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zecora wrote: |
| Code: |
...
Couldn't change to directory /var/tmp/portage/homedir/C: No such file or directory at Makefile.PL line 18
...
|
What info do you guys need and have you seen this error before? |
Hi.
Have you checked your /etc/make.conf file? Are you using a Portage overlay? Are you using the sandbox or usersandbox features?
I believe that this is more likely to be a Portage error than a Stage1/3 guide problem, but if Bob doesn't mind we could try to pinpoint it here and if it ends up being a Portage error we can ask a moderator to split the thread. You should also post emerge --info.
_________________
Jorge.
Your twisted, but hopefully friendly daemon.
AMD64 / x86 / Sparc Gentoo
Help answer || emwrap.sh
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
well, i haven't seen any problems in building perl-5.8.7-r3, so i'd agree with Jorge that we should look at your system config.
its kind of hard to tell exactly what is going wrong because you haven't provided us with enough information. at an absolute minimum, you need to follow the "How To Ask For Support" instructions in bright red letters on Page 1 of this thread. armed with that information, we'll have a clue about what to look for. without it, there's nothing that we can do to help. 
that change of directories to ../homedir/C does look rather odd to me...
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nightmorph
Developer
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 1382
Location: SoCal
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2006 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Seeing as you're trying to run an unstable version of perl, that might be the cause of some (or all) of your problems. Might want to check Bugzilla and search for perl problems. Also, head on over to mcummings' blog. He's the perl guy and has been blogging about all the changes it's undergoing.
_________________
<UzzaDead> What is CONFIG_USB_MON?
<petteyg> A Jamaican USB configuration?
dirtyepic: "We have more cupholders."
GDP || PR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pandor
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 128
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2006 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been running my stage3/1 gcc 3.4.4 setup for quite some time now but today i noticed that emerge wanted to update from gcc-3.4.4-r1 to gcc-3.4.5.
How's that?
I have ~sys-devel/gcc-3.4.4 in my /etc/portage/package.keywords, as instructed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nightmorph
Developer
Joined: 23 Jan 2005
Posts: 1382
Location: SoCal
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, you do know that gcc-3.4.4 was marked stable months ago, right? No need for it in package.keywords anymore.
That might explain why Portage wants you to upgrade to 3.4.5, which is the current ~unstable version.
_________________
<UzzaDead> What is CONFIG_USB_MON?
<petteyg> A Jamaican USB configuration?
dirtyepic: "We have more cupholders."
GDP || PR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pandor
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 128
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nightmorph wrote: | Well, you do know that gcc-3.4.4 was marked stable months ago, right? No need for it in package.keywords anymore.
That might explain why Portage wants you to upgrade to 3.4.5, which is the current ~unstable version. |
I am aware of that, but should it matter?
and i quote:
| Bob P wrote: | | rutski89 wrote: | | Code: | # cat /etc/portage/package.keywords
~sys-devel/gcc-3.4.4 ~x86
sys-devel/gcc-config ~x86
sys-libs/libstdc++-v3 ~x86
sys-libs/glibc ~x86 |
~sys-devel/gcc-3.4.4 ~x86 Are you sure thats right? A '~' in the front with a version number attached? I've persoanlly never seen either, what do they do? |
hehe. yes, i'm sure that's right. just because you've never seen somebody use a valid package masking atom with a version number doesn't mean that its invalid!
the atom specifically enables the testing branch version of GCC while restricting the testing branch version number to 3.4.4. it may be helpful to review the rules on atoms that are used for package masking if the syntax of the command seems unfamiliar.  |
| nightmorph wrote: | | the ~ in front of the package means that any revision of gcc 3.4.4 can be used; whenever the ebuild for gcc 3.4.4-r1, or 3.4.4.20050610-r3, or 3.4.4-r78 comes out, gcc 3.4.4 will be upgraded to this latest version. It still locks in the base package series of gcc 3.4.4, while allowing any suffixes to be added to this. So 3.4.4.20050610 is allowed, but NOT 3.4.5, for example. |
[source: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-345229-highlight-stage+gcc.html]
So why does it want to get 3.4.5 despite having a tilde in front of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wjb
Guru
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 323
Location: Fife, Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 3.4.5 is stable x86 now. Do the squiggles stop a newer stable package? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pandor
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 128
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wjb wrote: | | 3.4.5 is stable x86 now. Do the squiggles stop a newer stable package? |
I just noticed and came back to edit my post...
Guess i'll have to mask it for now then.
Don't feel like going through the hassle of a gcc update.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2006 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
notice the first line of the post referenced in your hyperlink:
| Bob P wrote: | | NOTICE: This version of the Stage 1/3 Guide is DEPRECATED. The current version is located >> HERE <<. |
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pandor
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 128
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bob P wrote: |
notice the first line of the post referenced in your hyperlink:
| Bob P wrote: | | NOTICE: This version of the Stage 1/3 Guide is DEPRECATED. The current version is located >> HERE <<. |
|
I fail to see the logic behind your post.
At the time i installed gentoo, the above guide was the most current, so why would i need the bother with a more current one? It's not like i'm doing another fresh 1/3 install...
I was just wondering why gcc got upgraded, so now i know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wjb
Guru
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 323
Location: Fife, Scotland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pandor wrote: |
Guess i'll have to mask it for now then.
Don't feel like going through the hassle of a gcc update.. |
Its not a major change, you don't need to rebuild everything. From Gentoo Linux GCC Upgrade Guide:
| Quote: | | Generally speaking, upgrades to bug fix releases, like from 3.3.5 to 3.3.6, should be quite safe -- just emerge new version, switch your system to use it and rebuild the only affected package, libtool. |
So far (since March 1st anyway), its been painless for me going from gcc 3.4.4-r1 to 3.4.5 (20min to rebuild gcc). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Installing Gentoo
