I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
downgraded to version 7.7.1 and my desktop works great again.
Now I want to prevent mesa from being updated until this issue is sorted
out upstream. I have looked at package.provide, but that didn't work.
Currently, I have placed media-libs/mesa into my
/etc/portage/package.mask file and this seems to do the trick. Is this
the recommended way for handling this situation?
Being a long time gentoo user, I want to do things the right way, so
just working fine isn't enough
--
Timur
10-18-2010, 10:17 AM
KH
Preventing a package from being updated
Am 18.10.2010 12:06, schrieb Timur Aydin:
> Hi,
>
> I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
> updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
> problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
> downgraded to version 7.7.1 and my desktop works great again.
>
> Now I want to prevent mesa from being updated until this issue is sorted
> out upstream. I have looked at package.provide, but that didn't work.
> Currently, I have placed media-libs/mesa into my
> /etc/portage/package.mask file and this seems to do the trick. Is this
> the recommended way for handling this situation?
>
> Being a long time gentoo user, I want to do things the right way, so
> just working fine isn't enough
>
Hi,
from man poratage:
"package.mask
A list of package atoms to mask. Useful if specific versions of packages
do not work well for you. For example, you swear by the Nvidia
drivers, but only versions earlier than 1.0.4496. No problem!"
Regards kh
10-18-2010, 10:45 AM
Neil Bothwick
Preventing a package from being updated
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:06:25 +0300, Timur Aydin wrote:
> I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
> updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
> problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
> downgraded to version 7.7.1 and my desktop works great again.
>
> Now I want to prevent mesa from being updated until this issue is sorted
> out upstream. I have looked at package.provide, but that didn't work.
> Currently, I have placed media-libs/mesa into my
> /etc/portage/package.mask file and this seems to do the trick. Is this
> the recommended way for handling this situation?
package.mask is the right place, but you should add the specific version.
Then the system will only upgrade when a newer (hopefully fixed) version
arrives.
=media-libs/mesa-7.8.2
--
Neil Bothwick
WindowError:01B Illegal error. Do NOT get this error.
10-22-2010, 02:11 PM
Allan Gottlieb
Preventing a package from being updated
Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> writes:
> On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:06:25 +0300, Timur Aydin wrote:
>
>> I am using the ~x86 (testing) version of gentoo linux. After recent
>> updates, my X windows became extremely sluggish and I found out that the
>> problem is related to a new version of mesa (7.8.2 specifically). So I
>> downgraded to version 7.7.1 and my desktop works great again.
>>
>> Now I want to prevent mesa from being updated until this issue is sorted
>> out upstream. I have looked at package.provide, but that didn't work.
>> Currently, I have placed media-libs/mesa into my
>> /etc/portage/package.mask file and this seems to do the trick. Is this
>> the recommended way for handling this situation?
>
> package.mask is the right place, but you should add the specific version.
> Then the system will only upgrade when a newer (hopefully fixed) version
> arrives.
>
> =media-libs/mesa-7.8.2
I tried this yesterday with great success. As mentioned in b.g.o. 7.8.2
causes slowdowns for many people (including me).
This system is ~amd64
But this morning after an eix-sync, my normal update failed
ajglap gottlieb # emerge --keep-going --update --newuse --with-bdeps=y --color n world
These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order:
!!! The following update has been skipped due to unsatisfied dependencies:
x11-base/xorg-server:0
!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=media-libs/mesa-7.8_rc[nptl=]" have been masked.
!!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:
- media-libs/mesa-7.8.2 (masked by: package.mask)
/etc/portage/package.mask:
# This version of mesa 7.8.2 is rummored to cause slowdown
# The previous version 7.7.1 is rummored to be much better
# Masking only 7.8.2 so that future (fixed??) versions can be installed
(dependency required by "x11-base/xorg-server-1.9.0.902" [ebuild])
For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge
man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
Would you like to merge these packages? [Yes/No] no
Quitting.
ajglap gottlieb #
Perhaps I should be downgrading xorg-server as well.
Since I would rather have a slow X than an angry portage,
I removed the package mask and expected all to be well, but was
surprised by the following. In particular at the end it says there is
one block but I don't see any.
Any help/advice would be appreciated.
allan
ajglap gottlieb # emerge --keep-going --update --newuse --with-bdeps=y --color n world
These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:11 on Friday 22 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
[snip]
> > package.mask is the right place, but you should add the specific version.
> > Then the system will only upgrade when a newer (hopefully fixed) version
> > arrives.
> >
> > =media-libs/mesa-7.8.2
>
> I tried this yesterday with great success. As mentioned in b.g.o. 7.8.2
> causes slowdowns for many people (including me).
> This system is ~amd64
>
> But this morning after an eix-sync, my normal update failed
[snip]
> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=media-libs/mesa-7.8_rc[nptl=]" have
> been masked. !!! One of the following masked packages is required to
> complete your request: - media-libs/mesa-7.8.2 (masked by: package.mask)
> /etc/portage/package.mask:
> # This version of mesa 7.8.2 is rummored to cause slowdown
> # The previous version 7.7.1 is rummored to be much better
> # Masking only 7.8.2 so that future (fixed??) versions can be installed
>
> (dependency required by "x11-base/xorg-server-1.9.0.902" [ebuild])
> For more information, see the MASKED PACKAGES section in the emerge
> man page or refer to the Gentoo Handbook.
>
> Would you like to merge these packages? [Yes/No] no
>
> Quitting.
>
> ajglap gottlieb #
>
> Perhaps I should be downgrading xorg-server as well.
Masking mesa-7.8.2 means (per the ebuilds) you will have to drop back to
xorg-server-1.7.7-r1. Both are latest stable versions. Or, you could always
install the xorg overlay and build the latest git copy of mesa...
>
> Since I would rather have a slow X than an angry portage,
> I removed the package mask and expected all to be well, but was
> surprised by the following. In particular at the end it says there is
> one block but I don't see any.
[snip]
Here you go:
> [blocks b ] <sys-apps/shadow-4.1.4.2-r6
> ("<sys-apps/shadow-4.1.4.2-r6" is blocking sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.2-r3)
> [ebuild U ] sys-apps/shadow-4.1.4.2-r6 [4.1.4.2-r5] USE="cracklib
> nls pam -audit (-selinux) -skey" 1,749 kB
Don't worry about it. I'm not sure if portage-2.1.9.20 will deal with this
automagically (I *think* it does these days and 2.2 definitely does) but if
not just
emerge -C shadow ; emerge -1 shadow
then emerge -avuND world.
No good technical reason for doing shadow first apart from getting it over and
done with while you watch and confirm it works fine. Then do world and wander
over to the kettle letting portage go on with doing it's thing unattended
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
10-23-2010, 03:13 AM
Allan Gottlieb
Preventing a package from being updated
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 16:11 on Friday 22 October 2010, Allan
> Gottlieb did opine thusly:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Perhaps I should be downgrading xorg-server as well.
>
> Masking mesa-7.8.2 means (per the ebuilds) you will have to drop back to
> xorg-server-1.7.7-r1. Both are latest stable versions.
See below
>>
>> Since I would rather have a slow X than an angry portage,
>> I removed the package mask and expected all to be well, but was
>> surprised by the following. In particular at the end it says there is
>> one block but I don't see any.
>
> [snip]
>
> Here you go:
>
>
>> [blocks b ] <sys-apps/shadow-4.1.4.2-r6
>> ("<sys-apps/shadow-4.1.4.2-r6" is blocking sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.2-r3)
>> [ebuild U ] sys-apps/shadow-4.1.4.2-r6 [4.1.4.2-r5] USE="cracklib
>> nls pam -audit (-selinux) -skey" 1,749 kB
I really did look for b's, but didn't see it. I guess I was looking
near the ] where all the U's are. Embarrassing, to say the least.
Thanks.
Now I have masked mesa-7.8.2 downgrading to 7.7.1, which necessitated a
downgrade of xorg-server to 1.7.7-r1 (latest stable), which necessitated
a downgrade of xinit to 1.2.1.
Thus my emerges now generate msgs that updates to xorg-server and xinit
are being skipped due to unsatisfied dependencies.
Other than this, the emerges perform normally and the system runs well.
I could mask the newer versions of xorg-server and xinit and possibly
prevent the emerge messages, but I am leaning toward leaving it as it is.
This way when mesa is updated (to a hopefully fixed version) everything
should update automatically.
Does that sound reasonable.
thanks again,
allan
10-23-2010, 09:06 AM
Alan McKinnon
Preventing a package from being updated
Apparently, though unproven, at 05:13 on Saturday 23 October 2010, Allan
Gottlieb did opine thusly:
> Now I have masked mesa-7.8.2 downgrading to 7.7.1, which necessitated a
> downgrade of xorg-server to 1.7.7-r1 (latest stable), which necessitated
> a downgrade of xinit to 1.2.1.
>
> Thus my emerges now generate msgs that updates to xorg-server and xinit
> are being skipped due to unsatisfied dependencies.
> Other than this, the emerges perform normally and the system runs well.
>
> I could mask the newer versions of xorg-server and xinit and possibly
> prevent the emerge messages, but I am leaning toward leaving it as it is.
> This way when mesa is updated (to a hopefully fixed version) everything
> should update automatically.
>
> Does that sound reasonable.
Yes, that will work fine. You'll just have to tolerate those messages in the
interim, but you know they are there and why. Nothing will break because of
it.
--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
10-23-2010, 11:50 AM
daid kahl
Preventing a package from being updated
> Don't worry about it. I'm not sure if portage-2.1.9.20 will deal with this
> automagically (I *think* it does these days and 2.2 definitely does) but if
> not just
>
> emerge -C shadow ; emerge -1 shadow
>
> then emerge -avuND world.
>
> No good technical reason for doing shadow first apart from getting it over and
> done with while you watch and confirm it works fine. Then do world and wander
> over to the kettle letting portage go on with doing it's thing unattended
For my own comfort, on a case like this, if I didn't have the portage
FEATURE buildpkg or buildsyspkg turned on, I'd make sure that was on
and that I had a functional backup of shadow to install from binary,
in case something went very wrong. But I tend to be extremely
cautious in terms of how I maintain my system, and a lot of that
caution is just paranoia.
~daid
10-23-2010, 01:12 PM
Allan Gottlieb
Preventing a package from being updated
daid kahl <daidxor@gmail.com> writes:
>> Don't worry about it. I'm not sure if portage-2.1.9.20 will deal with this
>> automagically (I *think* it does these days and 2.2 definitely does) but if
>> not just
>>
>> emerge -C shadow ; emerge -1 shadow
>>
>> then emerge -avuND world.
>>
>> No good technical reason for doing shadow first apart from getting it over and
>> done with while you watch and confirm it works fine. Then do world and wander
>> over to the kettle letting portage go on with doing it's thing unattended
>
> For my own comfort, on a case like this, if I didn't have the portage
> FEATURE buildpkg or buildsyspkg turned on, I'd make sure that was on
> and that I had a functional backup of shadow to install from binary,
> in case something went very wrong. But I tend to be extremely
> cautious in terms of how I maintain my system, and a lot of that
> caution is just paranoia.
Thanks for the advice. I do use quickpkg as well.
allan
10-23-2010, 01:12 PM
Allan Gottlieb
Preventing a package from being updated
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> writes:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 05:13 on Saturday 23 October 2010, Allan
> Gottlieb did opine thusly:
>
>> Now I have masked mesa-7.8.2 downgrading to 7.7.1, which necessitated a
>> downgrade of xorg-server to 1.7.7-r1 (latest stable), which necessitated
>> a downgrade of xinit to 1.2.1.
>>
>> Thus my emerges now generate msgs that updates to xorg-server and xinit
>> are being skipped due to unsatisfied dependencies.
>> Other than this, the emerges perform normally and the system runs well.
>>
>> I could mask the newer versions of xorg-server and xinit and possibly
>> prevent the emerge messages, but I am leaning toward leaving it as it is.
>> This way when mesa is updated (to a hopefully fixed version) everything
>> should update automatically.
>>
>> Does that sound reasonable.
>
> Yes, that will work fine. You'll just have to tolerate those messages in the
> interim, but you know they are there and why. Nothing will break because of
> it.
Preventing a package from being updated
