Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

tuxic
Hi,

got a problem this morning:

>>> Verifying ebuild manifests
>>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
 * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
 *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction
 * ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo failed (pretend phase):
 *   aborting to save your system
 *
 * Call stack:
 *                ebuild.sh, line 115:  Called pkg_pretend
 *                ebuild.sh, line 348:  Called toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend
 *   toolchain-glibc.eclass, line 507:  Called die
 * The specific snippet of code:
 *   die "aborting to save your system"
 *
 * If you need support, post the output of `emerge --info '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`,
 * the complete build log and the output of `emerge -pqv '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`.
 * The complete build log is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/build.log'.
 * The ebuild environment file is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/die.env'.
 * Working directory: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/homedir'
 * S: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/work/glibc-2.24'
>>> Running pre-merge checks for media-sound/pulseaudio-11.0
 * Determining the location of the kernel source code
 * Found kernel source directory:
 *     /usr/src/linux
 * Found sources for kernel version:
 *     4.13.1-RT
 * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options...
 [ ok ]
 * A preallocated buffer-size of 2048 (kB) or higher is recommended for the HD-audio driver!
 * CONFIG_SND_HDA_PREALLOC_SIZE=64

I would interpret this as:

In the past emerge had updated glibc to a higher version as it want it
to install now and prevented the latter becayse it would be downgrade,
which in turn would render my box useless.

But why updateing to higher version in the first step....or attempting
to downgrade now?

And finally...ANy update is blocked for now it seems...how can I get
out of this?

Thanks a lot in advance for any help!
Cheers
Meino



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

Dale-46
[hidden email] wrote:

> Hi,
>
> got a problem this morning:
>
>>>> Verifying ebuild manifests
>>>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
>  * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
>  *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction
>  * ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo failed (pretend phase):
>  *   aborting to save your system
>  *
>  * Call stack:
>  *                ebuild.sh, line 115:  Called pkg_pretend
>  *                ebuild.sh, line 348:  Called toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend
>  *   toolchain-glibc.eclass, line 507:  Called die
>  * The specific snippet of code:
>  *   die "aborting to save your system"
>  *
>  * If you need support, post the output of `emerge --info '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`,
>  * the complete build log and the output of `emerge -pqv '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`.
>  * The complete build log is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/build.log'.
>  * The ebuild environment file is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/die.env'.
>  * Working directory: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/homedir'
>  * S: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/work/glibc-2.24'
>>>> Running pre-merge checks for media-sound/pulseaudio-11.0
>  * Determining the location of the kernel source code
>  * Found kernel source directory:
>  *     /usr/src/linux
>  * Found sources for kernel version:
>  *     4.13.1-RT
>  * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options...
>  [ ok ]
>  * A preallocated buffer-size of 2048 (kB) or higher is recommended for the HD-audio driver!
>  * CONFIG_SND_HDA_PREALLOC_SIZE=64
>
> I would interpret this as:
>
> In the past emerge had updated glibc to a higher version as it want it
> to install now and prevented the latter becayse it would be downgrade,
> which in turn would render my box useless.
>
> But why updateing to higher version in the first step....or attempting
> to downgrade now?
>
> And finally...ANy update is blocked for now it seems...how can I get
> out of this?
>
> Thanks a lot in advance for any help!
> Cheers
> Meino
>

I would start by adding -t to the emerge command.  That should show what
is pulling in the older glibc.  Hopefully, that will shine a light on
the why it wants to downgrade. 

May be a good idea to post that info here as well.  May help others with
a answer since it should provide more info. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

Alan McKinnon-2
In reply to this post by tuxic
On 12/09/2017 05:43, [hidden email] wrote:

> Hi,
>
> got a problem this morning:
>
>>>> Verifying ebuild manifests
>>>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
>  * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
>  *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction
>  * ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo failed (pretend phase):
>  *   aborting to save your system
>  *
>  * Call stack:
>  *                ebuild.sh, line 115:  Called pkg_pretend
>  *                ebuild.sh, line 348:  Called toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend
>  *   toolchain-glibc.eclass, line 507:  Called die
>  * The specific snippet of code:
>  *   die "aborting to save your system"
>  *
>  * If you need support, post the output of `emerge --info '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`,
>  * the complete build log and the output of `emerge -pqv '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`.
>  * The complete build log is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/build.log'.
>  * The ebuild environment file is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/die.env'.
>  * Working directory: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/homedir'
>  * S: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/work/glibc-2.24'
>>>> Running pre-merge checks for media-sound/pulseaudio-11.0
>  * Determining the location of the kernel source code
>  * Found kernel source directory:
>  *     /usr/src/linux
>  * Found sources for kernel version:
>  *     4.13.1-RT
>  * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options...
>  [ ok ]
>  * A preallocated buffer-size of 2048 (kB) or higher is recommended for the HD-audio driver!
>  * CONFIG_SND_HDA_PREALLOC_SIZE=64
>
> I would interpret this as:

Looks to me like you are assuming the glibc maintainer has more
knowledge of the future that he/she actually has.

>
> In the past emerge had updated glibc to a higher version as it want it
> to install now and prevented the latter becayse it would be downgrade,
> which in turn would render my box useless.

No, not useless. It's a safety check for just in case. And now you must
bypass the checks

>
> But why updateing to higher version in the first step

Because you had a valid ebuild in the tree that said to do it ?
>
....or attempting
> to downgrade now?

Because now you don't have that valid ebuild anymore?


>
> And finally...ANy update is blocked for now it seems...how can I get
> out of this?

Why is glibc wanting to downgrade? What is your current version?

both of these versions are in the tree: (~)2.24-r4^s (~)2.25-r4^s
so there is at least 1 glibc higher than what portage wants to downgrade to.

You need to find out why 2.25-r4 is not being used. Usual tools, e.g.:

grep -r glibc /etc/portage
and any other methods you prefer

As a last resort if the ebuld maintainer screwed up, you can bypass the
safety check. Edit ${PORTDIR}/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass and comment
out the check in
toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend()

This is unlikely to destroy the system. Cause a problem - maybe. Destroy
it? No. The wording of the safety check is hugely over-dramatic to
discourage people from downgrading willy-nilly without thinking

--
Alan McKinnon
[hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

Franz Fellner
My guess: You have glibc-2.24-r4 and one of the 2.25 with revision <-r4 listed WITH EXACT VERSION AND REVISiON in your package.accept_keywords. The recent glibc-cleanp remove those 2.25 revisions and only left 2.25-r4 and 2.24-r4 Leaving you with the downgrade as only option to get the most recent available version.

2017-09-12 9:17 GMT+02:00 Alan McKinnon <[hidden email]>:
On 12/09/2017 05:43, [hidden email] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> got a problem this morning:
>
>>>> Verifying ebuild manifests
>>>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
>  * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
>  *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction
>  * ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo failed (pretend phase):
>  *   aborting to save your system
>  *
>  * Call stack:
>  *                ebuild.sh, line 115:  Called pkg_pretend
>  *                ebuild.sh, line 348:  Called toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend
>  *   toolchain-glibc.eclass, line 507:  Called die
>  * The specific snippet of code:
>  *                    die "aborting to save your system"
>  *
>  * If you need support, post the output of `emerge --info '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`,
>  * the complete build log and the output of `emerge -pqv '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`.
>  * The complete build log is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/build.log'.
>  * The ebuild environment file is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/temp/die.env'.
>  * Working directory: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/homedir'
>  * S: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/work/glibc-2.24'
>>>> Running pre-merge checks for media-sound/pulseaudio-11.0
>  * Determining the location of the kernel source code
>  * Found kernel source directory:
>  *     /usr/src/linux
>  * Found sources for kernel version:
>  *     4.13.1-RT
>  * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options...
>  [ ok ]
>  * A preallocated buffer-size of 2048 (kB) or higher is recommended for the HD-audio driver!
>  * CONFIG_SND_HDA_PREALLOC_SIZE=64
>
> I would interpret this as:

Looks to me like you are assuming the glibc maintainer has more
knowledge of the future that he/she actually has.

>
> In the past emerge had updated glibc to a higher version as it want it
> to install now and prevented the latter becayse it would be downgrade,
> which in turn would render my box useless.

No, not useless. It's a safety check for just in case. And now you must
bypass the checks

>
> But why updateing to higher version in the first step

Because you had a valid ebuild in the tree that said to do it ?
>
....or attempting
> to downgrade now?

Because now you don't have that valid ebuild anymore?


>
> And finally...ANy update is blocked for now it seems...how can I get
> out of this?

Why is glibc wanting to downgrade? What is your current version?

both of these versions are in the tree: (~)2.24-r4^s (~)2.25-r4^s
so there is at least 1 glibc higher than what portage wants to downgrade to.

You need to find out why 2.25-r4 is not being used. Usual tools, e.g.:

grep -r glibc /etc/portage
and any other methods you prefer

As a last resort if the ebuld maintainer screwed up, you can bypass the
safety check. Edit ${PORTDIR}/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass and comment
out the check in
toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend()

This is unlikely to destroy the system. Cause a problem - maybe. Destroy
it? No. The wording of the safety check is hugely over-dramatic to
discourage people from downgrading willy-nilly without thinking

--
Alan McKinnon
[hidden email]



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

tuxic
Hi,

WRONG! :) :) :)

I did something different, but it was the same amount of "wrong".

I masked =sys-libs/glibc-2.25-r4.

And now I remember why I did this: It gave a compilation error:
(As some other packages) it has problems with my texinfo installation
as it seems.

As suggested I run perl-cleaner, I checked my environment for
suspicious entrie...but looks fine (at least for me).

I really wnat to get rid of this damn texinfo problem and I
desperately aksing for help, since I didn't found the problem myself.

But before bombarding the mailinglist with TONS of logs I would like
to ask, what logging to post first?

Cheers and thanks for the support in advance!
Meino





On 09/12 07:32, Franz Fellner wrote:

> My guess: You have glibc-2.24-r4 and one of the 2.25 with revision <-r4
> listed WITH EXACT VERSION AND REVISiON in your package.accept_keywords. The
> recent glibc-cleanp remove those 2.25 revisions and only left 2.25-r4 and
> 2.24-r4 Leaving you with the downgrade as only option to get the most
> recent available version.
>
> 2017-09-12 9:17 GMT+02:00 Alan McKinnon <[hidden email]>:
>
> > On 12/09/2017 05:43, [hidden email] wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > got a problem this morning:
> > >
> > >>>> Verifying ebuild manifests
> > >>>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
> > >  * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
> > >  *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction
> > >  * ERROR: sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo failed (pretend phase):
> > >  *   aborting to save your system
> > >  *
> > >  * Call stack:
> > >  *                ebuild.sh, line 115:  Called pkg_pretend
> > >  *                ebuild.sh, line 348:  Called
> > toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend
> > >  *   toolchain-glibc.eclass, line 507:  Called die
> > >  * The specific snippet of code:
> > >  *                    die "aborting to save your system"
> > >  *
> > >  * If you need support, post the output of `emerge --info
> > '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`,
> > >  * the complete build log and the output of `emerge -pqv
> > '=sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4::gentoo'`.
> > >  * The complete build log is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/
> > glibc-2.24-r4/temp/build.log'.
> > >  * The ebuild environment file is located at '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/
> > glibc-2.24-r4/temp/die.env'.
> > >  * Working directory: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/homedir'
> > >  * S: '/var/tmp/portage/sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4/work/glibc-2.24'
> > >>>> Running pre-merge checks for media-sound/pulseaudio-11.0
> > >  * Determining the location of the kernel source code
> > >  * Found kernel source directory:
> > >  *     /usr/src/linux
> > >  * Found sources for kernel version:
> > >  *     4.13.1-RT
> > >  * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options...
> > >  [ ok ]
> > >  * A preallocated buffer-size of 2048 (kB) or higher is recommended for
> > the HD-audio driver!
> > >  * CONFIG_SND_HDA_PREALLOC_SIZE=64
> > >
> > > I would interpret this as:
> >
> > Looks to me like you are assuming the glibc maintainer has more
> > knowledge of the future that he/she actually has.
> >
> > >
> > > In the past emerge had updated glibc to a higher version as it want it
> > > to install now and prevented the latter becayse it would be downgrade,
> > > which in turn would render my box useless.
> >
> > No, not useless. It's a safety check for just in case. And now you must
> > bypass the checks
> >
> > >
> > > But why updateing to higher version in the first step
> >
> > Because you had a valid ebuild in the tree that said to do it ?
> > >
> > ....or attempting
> > > to downgrade now?
> >
> > Because now you don't have that valid ebuild anymore?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > And finally...ANy update is blocked for now it seems...how can I get
> > > out of this?
> >
> > Why is glibc wanting to downgrade? What is your current version?
> >
> > both of these versions are in the tree: (~)2.24-r4^s (~)2.25-r4^s
> > so there is at least 1 glibc higher than what portage wants to downgrade
> > to.
> >
> > You need to find out why 2.25-r4 is not being used. Usual tools, e.g.:
> >
> > grep -r glibc /etc/portage
> > and any other methods you prefer
> >
> > As a last resort if the ebuld maintainer screwed up, you can bypass the
> > safety check. Edit ${PORTDIR}/eclass/toolchain-glibc.eclass and comment
> > out the check in
> > toolchain-glibc_pkg_pretend()
> >
> > This is unlikely to destroy the system. Cause a problem - maybe. Destroy
> > it? No. The wording of the safety check is hugely over-dramatic to
> > discourage people from downgrading willy-nilly without thinking
> >
> > --
> > Alan McKinnon
> > [hidden email]
> >
> >
> >

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

Andreas K. Huettel
In reply to this post by tuxic
Am Dienstag, 12. September 2017, 05:43:59 CEST schrieb [hidden email]:
> Hi,
>
> got a problem this morning:
> >>> Verifying ebuild manifests
> >>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
>
>  * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
>  *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction

... because I accidentally removed 2.24-r4 instead of 2.24-r3.

Got fixed a few hours later as soon as someone filed a bug.
(I wanted to keep the last 2.24 revision.)

--> so, file bugs! :)

That said, 2.24 won't go stable; the current stable candidate is 2.25-r5.

--
Andreas K. Hüttel
[hidden email]
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

Andreas K. Huettel
In reply to this post by tuxic
> I masked =sys-libs/glibc-2.25-r4.
>
> And now I remember why I did this: It gave a compilation error:
> (As some other packages) it has problems with my texinfo installation
> as it seems.
>

bug number?


--
Andreas K. Hüttel
[hidden email]
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

tuxic
In reply to this post by Andreas K. Huettel
On 09/12 04:50, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:

> Am Dienstag, 12. September 2017, 05:43:59 CEST schrieb [hidden email]:
> > Hi,
> >
> > got a problem this morning:
> > >>> Verifying ebuild manifests
> > >>> Running pre-merge checks for sys-libs/glibc-2.24-r4
> >
> >  * Sanity check to keep you from breaking your system:
> >  *  Downgrading glibc is not supported and a sure way to destruction
>
> ... because I accidentally removed 2.24-r4 instead of 2.24-r3.
>
> Got fixed a few hours later as soon as someone filed a bug.
> (I wanted to keep the last 2.24 revision.)
>
> --> so, file bugs! :)
>
> That said, 2.24 won't go stable; the current stable candidate is 2.25-r5.
>
> --
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> [hidden email]
> Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)
>

Hi Andreas,

...and it was also a configuration bug on my side (see my last
posting).

Do you know how to solve this long lasting texinfo problem on my side?

Cheers
Meino



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

tuxic
In reply to this post by Andreas K. Huettel
On 09/12 04:52, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:

> > I masked =sys-libs/glibc-2.25-r4.
> >
> > And now I remember why I did this: It gave a compilation error:
> > (As some other packages) it has problems with my texinfo installation
> > as it seems.
> >
>
> bug number?
>
>
> --
> Andreas K. Hüttel
> [hidden email]
> Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)
>

Hi Andreas,

hrrrmmm....no the problem is on my side...somewhere.
It is not considered a Gentoo-bug...


Cheers
Meino



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Downgrading glibc prevented by emerge/portage...but why initiated?

Mike Gilbert-2
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:57 PM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 09/12 04:52, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> > I masked =sys-libs/glibc-2.25-r4.
>> >
>> > And now I remember why I did this: It gave a compilation error:
>> > (As some other packages) it has problems with my texinfo installation
>> > as it seems.
>> >
>>
>> bug number?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andreas K. Hüttel
>> [hidden email]
>> Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)
>>
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> hrrrmmm....no the problem is on my side...somewhere.
> It is not considered a Gentoo-bug...
>
>

Here are the previous ml threads on this topic.

https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-user/message/143c7501eedc377a72a98cdf5a1b4280

https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-user/message/e25e368978d10615346bd18a8b3740e8