View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ExecutorElassus Veteran
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 1435 Location: Berlin, Germany
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:51 pm Post subject: atom-9999::mva fails to emerge at install phase |
|
|
So, I got here by several steps:
using app-editor/atom-1.32.0_beta3 from the cynede overlay, I was unable to update dependent packages: the file /usr/share/atom/resources/app/apm/node_modules/npm/node_modules/npm-lifecycle/node-gyp-bin/node-gyp refused to execute with a "Permission denied" error. So I thought this was just something wrong with that version (the file, incidentally, also points to the wrong directory to find the linked node-gyp.js executable, but even when this is fixed it fails out). So I tried the mva overlay, which appears to have a "live" ebuild for atom-9999.
Trying to install that, however, it fails at the install phase with the following error:
Code: | Running electron-packager on /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/out/app with app name "atom"
... and 1 more
Packaging app for platform linux x64 using electron v2.0.11
Changing permissions for node files in /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/out/atom-dev-1.33.0-dev-d29bb96c8-amd64
Copying non-ASAR resources to /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/out/atom-dev-1.33.0-dev-d29bb96c8-amd64/resources
Writing LICENSE.md to /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/out/atom-dev-1.33.0-dev-d29bb96c8-amd64/resources
Application bundle created at /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/out/atom-dev-1.33.0-dev-d29bb96c8-amd64
Generating snapshot script at "/var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/out/startup.js" (189)Error: ENOENT: no such file or directory, open 'exception-reporting'
at Object.fs.openSync (fs.js:660:18)
at Object.fs.readFileSync (fs.js:565:33)
at /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/script/node_modules/electron-link/lib/generate-snapshot-script.js:28:27
at Generator.next (<anonymous>:null:null)
at step (/var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/script/node_modules/electron-link/lib/generate-snapshot-script.js:3:191)
at /var/tmp/portage/app-editors/atom-9999/work/atom-9999/script/node_modules/electron-link/lib/generate-snapshot-script.js:3:361
at <anonymous>:null:null
|
Can somebody help me please sort out all the various packages that are breaking on my atom install?
cheers,
EE |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John R. Graham Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Posts: 10589 Location: Somewhere over Atlanta, Georgia
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Moved from Portage & Programming to Unsupported Software. The cynede overlay is not officially supported so the thread fits better here.
- John _________________ I can confirm that I have received between 0 and 499 National Security Letters. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ExecutorElassus Veteran
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 1435 Location: Berlin, Germany
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 5:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
well, technically we're talking about the mva overlay now, since that's the one I can't emerge. But since that one isn't officially supported either, iirc, I guess it doesn't much matter.
Any guess what this error is?
Cheers,
EE |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ExecutorElassus Veteran
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 1435 Location: Berlin, Germany
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been digging into this a bit, and now I have a peripheral question: it may be the case that atom-1.32.0 requires a more recent version of nodejs, but that would require using openssl-1.1*, which is currently masked. So here's my next question: how likely will unmasking openssl-1.1.0i (which is what's in the portage tree right now for the -1.1* series) børk my system? The bugreports strongly suggest the likelihood is high, but maybe it's not so terrible?
Cheers,
EE |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fedeliallalinea Administrator
Joined: 08 Mar 2003 Posts: 30905 Location: here
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2018 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can check if there are packages installed in your system with a open bug for openssl-1.1
EDIT: openssl-1.1 is hard masked, then the chance of having problems is high _________________ Questions are guaranteed in life; Answers aren't. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hu Moderator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007 Posts: 21624
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2018 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
We have somewhat routinely see forum threads from people who had a problem that was traced to them unmasking OpenSSL 1.1. In those cases, they did it unknowingly because they blindly trusted autounmask. You would be in a slightly better position since you would know to be suspicious of OpenSSL-related failures. If you retain a tbz2 of openssl-1.0.x, you should be able to back out if the situation goes badly. There might still be a fair amount of rebuilding to get all packages back to the 1.0.x subslot though. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ExecutorElassus Veteran
Joined: 11 Mar 2004 Posts: 1435 Location: Berlin, Germany
|
Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
addendum: it turns out that the problem I have with atom only occurs on the 1.32.* branch. The 1.31.* version (which appears to be the last that appears to require USE="python_targets_python2_7") works fine.
So, I suspect that whatever changed for the 1.32.* branch, be it python 3, or something else, is preventing the gyp-rebuild process from working properly.
But since the workaround is just to use atom-1.31.1, I can just do that.
Cheers,
EE |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|