Can't emerge world because of masked dependancy mpg123

Message

BradB · Post by **BradB** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:21 pm

Well, the title says it all, I can't even emerge -pu world because I get the following error:

all ebuilds that could satisfy media-sound/mpg123 have been masked.

And they are! Even ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" doesn't fix this. Portage knows about 4 packages (0.59r-r2, 0.59s-r1, 0.59r-r3, 0.59s), and they are all masked by package.mask. I could hack my package.mask, but I am sure that the following mask is there for a reason

Code: Select all

<=media-sound/mpg123-0.59s-r1

Oh, and I'd just done an "emerge rsync"

So, what can I do now? Also, what is with the 0.59s & 0.59r version numbers, I don't think I've seen "s" suffixes before.

Cheers
Brad

Davin · Post by **Davin** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:28 pm

Same problem. Here's the full output:

root@napalm davin # emerge -u --deep world
Calculating world dependencies \
!!! all ebuilds that could satisfy "media-sound/mpg123" have been masked.
!!! possible candidates are:
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59r-r2 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59s-r1 (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59r-r3 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59s (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
!!! (dependency required by "kde-base/kdemultimedia-3.2.0" [ebuild])

!!! Problem with ebuild kde-base/kde-3.2.0
!!! Possibly a DEPEND/*DEPEND problem.

!!! Depgraph creation failed.
root@napalm davin # emerge mpg123
Calculating dependencies
!!! all ebuilds that could satisfy "mpg123" have been masked.
!!! possible candidates are:
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59r-r2 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59s-r1 (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59r-r3 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59s (masked by: package.mask, ~keyword)

!!! Error calculating dependencies. Please correct.
root@napalm davin # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge mpg123
Calculating dependencies
!!! all ebuilds that could satisfy "mpg123" have been masked.
!!! possible candidates are:
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59r-r2 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59s-r1 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59r-r3 (masked by: package.mask)
- media-sound/mpg123-0.59s (masked by: package.mask)

!!! Error calculating dependencies. Please correct.

Anyone have some input? Figures, I put off my update for a few days, and when I have some time away from the comp this happens.

psylo · Post by **psylo** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:32 pm

At first sight, it's recommended to replace mpg123 by mpg321 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14940 ).

BradB · Post by **BradB** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:35 pm

I noticed that bug report - mpg321 should fill the virtual package mpg123, right? I'm not at my box to check right now, will this fix it up?

emerge -C mpg123
emerge mpg321
emerge -u world

Brad

Davin · Post by **Davin** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:36 pm

Just so nobody else gets their hopes up, merging mpg321 will *not* fix this problem.

Earthwings · Post by **Earthwings** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:37 pm

package.mask wrote: grep -B 2 mpg /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask
# <solar@gentoo.org> (15 Feb 2004)
# heap overflow bug #40631
<=media-sound/mpg123-0.59s-r1

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40631

psylo · Post by **psylo** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:38 pm

BradB wrote:I noticed that bug report - mpg321 should fill the virtual package mpg123, right? I'm not at my box to check right now, will this fix it up?

emerge -C mpg123
emerge mpg321
emerge -u world

Brad

Normally, according Bugzilla, yes... I'm trying it...

Davin · Post by **Davin** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:38 pm

BradB wrote:I noticed that bug report - mpg321 should fill the virtual package mpg123, right? I'm not at my box to check right now, will this fix it up?

emerge -C mpg123
emerge mpg321
emerge -u world

Brad

Nah, not even unmerging mpg123 and then merging mpg321 will fix it. Looks like we have a true dependency b0rk on our hands.

Seph64 · Post by **Seph64** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:39 pm

Even replacing mpg123 with mpg321 does not solve this problem for me. Only Gentoo would mask a dependency that would screw up the use of emerge -UD world.

Now I can't update my Gentoo install untill a fix is posted, what am I to do?

Davin · Post by **Davin** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:41 pm

"Only Gentoo?" Someone goofed and we're the first ones to make noise, give me a break already. People are only human.

Earthwings provided the link to the cause of the problem:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40631

So...we've got to wait for someone to unmask it.

BradB · Post by **BradB** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:42 pm

According to the above bug report, it should now be unmasked in portage (so emerge rsync should fix it right?)
(or manually hack the /usr/portage/profile/package.mask file)

However, this does highlight a significant failing in portage, the inability to continue when some packages can't be satisfied. I think portage should say that a package can't be satisfied & then continue upgrading other packages that don't have the broken dependancy.

Brad

Seph64 · Post by **Seph64** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:46 pm

Davin wrote:"Only Gentoo?" Someone goofed and we're the first ones to make noise, give me a break already. People are only human.

Earthwings provided the link to the cause of the problem:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40631

So...we've got to wait for someone to unmask it.

I don't think I was talking directly to you.

Anyway, I was not being serious by the "Only Gentoo" I love Gentoo. It's my Linux of choice. Hope this issue is resolved soon.

Davin · Post by **Davin** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:46 pm

I think you misread, while it is possible to do another sync now the package is still broken. If you'll look at the thread again, it looks like we have a devel war on our hands.

psylo · Post by **psylo** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:52 pm

I'm really not lucky... I try to emerge KDE 3.2 since 3 days... I solve a qt problem, a libjpeg problem but a devel war problem, I think I cannot solve it!!!

Earthwings · Post by **Earthwings** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:58 pm

There's much input on bug 40631 now, wait some time and it will be fixed.

nadamsieee · Post by **nadamsieee** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:18 pm

See also: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26787

sigmalll · Post by **sigmalll** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:40 pm

Its fixed. I find more disturbing that a single person can break the tree and have the attitude that we should just 'cope'.

solar · Post by **solar** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 10:22 pm

There has been zero breakage. package masking is no more than a delay in updating your tree.
portage still functions as it always has and you the user always have the option of adding this to your package.unmask
I'm sorry if this has caused you problems but package masking is at times the only option we have until we can touch base with a maintainer.

Earthwings · Post by **Earthwings** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 10:29 pm

I don't think it's a good idea to carry out such discussions (flamewars) to bugzilla. I'm afraid that does in no way look professional to anyone who is not too familiar with gentoo. Discussing things in #gentoo-dev should be enough.

avenj · Post by **avenj** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 10:33 pm

Earthwings wrote:I don't think it's a good idea to carry out such discussions (flamewars) to bugzilla. I'm afraid that does in no way look professional to anyone who is not too familiar with gentoo. Discussing things in #gentoo-dev should be enough.

This is an open project; we try to discuss things on open mediums. Open development is, to me, more important than plastering on a fake smiley face for people browsing bugzilla while discussing these things on other mediums.

Davin · Post by **Davin** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 10:56 pm

avenj wrote:
Earthwings wrote:I don't think it's a good idea to carry out such discussions (flamewars) to bugzilla. I'm afraid that does in no way look professional to anyone who is not too familiar with gentoo. Discussing things in #gentoo-dev should be enough.
This is an open project; we try to discuss things on open mediums. Open development is, to me, more important than plastering on a fake smiley face for people browsing bugzilla while discussing these things on other mediums.

I concur on the point of "fake smiley faces". The conversation was eventually moved to a more appropriate medium regardless.

Earthwings · Post by **Earthwings** » Sun Feb 15, 2004 11:02 pm

avenj wrote: This is an open project; we try to discuss things on open mediums. Open development is, to me, more important than plastering on a fake smiley face for people browsing bugzilla while discussing these things on other mediums.

You got me wrong (my fault). What I wanted to point out was that most of the "discussion" was not about how to fix the bug, but how to handle the general case and who was responsible for breaking things. I don't think there is much use to have this recorded in bugzilla.

nadamsieee · Post by **nadamsieee** » Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:13 am

Earthwings wrote:
avenj wrote: This is an open project; we try to discuss things on open mediums. Open development is, to me, more important than plastering on a fake smiley face for people browsing bugzilla while discussing these things on other mediums.
You got me wrong (my fault). What I wanted to point out was that most of the "discussion" was not about how to fix the bug, but how to handle the general case and who was responsible for breaking things. I don't think there is much use to have this recorded in bugzilla.

Bugzilla is the bug squashing tool for Gentoo. It creates the neccessary artifacts (a log + attachments in this case) to keep the bugs squashed and Gentoo rolling along. In any engineering project, you sometimes find one bug that uncovers yet another bug and yet another bug and so on. Sometimes you find out that the underlying bug is the process itself. So I think having a nice log of this sort of discussion in Bugzilla is perfectly valid. This sort of thing happens all of the time in the professional world.

Just one humble engineer's honest opinion.

sigmalll · Post by **sigmalll** » Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:49 am

If any dev working on a project I was heading ripped the rug out from under everyone else AND this action directly impacted on end customers, they would have to have a truly amazing reason for me not to start reconsidering their position.

solar · Post by **solar** » Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:33 am

It's pretty universal that some people will dislike some of the decisions made by security teams till they realize they saved your arse. Take this to a corporation and give them the the choice of 30 mins of downtime(while things are fixed) vs 30 days of cleanup(if nothing is done at all) it will become clear what's the preferred solution of the two rather quickly. Other than that I've got no idea what truly amazing reason you want me to justify. We have policies in place and I followed them, and while following these policies we all discovered that we have conflicting policies and schools of thought within Gentoo that are not going to be easily solvable.