Hi Austin,
I wanted to see if I could simulate your situation. Since I had a 6.6
-stable desktop, I did a syspatch, upgraded that to 6.7, and then
encountered something very much like what you described when I did a
pkg_add -uUvVm.
Not completely sure why but I felt that spidermonkey update failure was
to blame for the firefox update failure so anyways I did a pkd_add -uU
spidermonkey. This showed me that gnome-code-assistance-3.16.1p9 could
not be upgraded. So I just did a pkg_delete gnome-code-assistance, along
with mousetweaks-3.12.0p3, goffice08-0.8.17p7, and ruby25-dbus-0.11.1
since they all had come up as not required for 6.7. After that pkg_add
-uUvVm upgraded ALL the packages. Also noticed that atk-2.30 on 6.6 to
was upgraded to atk-2.34.1p1 on 6.7.
Hope this is useful info. If there is any benefit in sending my
/var/log/messages that show all the package additions and deletions,
please let me know as well. Have a nice day,
Vijay
On 2020-07-30 13:13, Austin Hook wrote:
Yes, I do believe the pkg_add -u is failing.
For starters here is my current package source info.
=============================================
farm# echo $PKG_PATH
farm# cat /etc/installurl
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.openbsd.org%2Fpub%2FOpenBSD&data=02%7C01%7C%7C91f1b235ffd046b4552808d834b46c28%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637317296792770540&sdata=UoLJoGl8t%2BlhsDh1XZXw9mOlbUrTonvE6dXZmqVIZUM%3D&reserved=0
farm#
=============================================
However, at some point earlier I had used
#export
PKG_PATH=https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fftp.vim.org%2FOpenBSD%2F6.6%2Fpackages%2Famd64%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C91f1b235ffd046b4552808d834b46c28%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637317296792770540&sdata=jLStPMDbuf8k8lURsnbRttz9rgyarfcbnz0Cd78tEsk%3D&reserved=0
[Now commented out in the .profile]
I had gotten behind in making updates, and so started using packages from
there.
My fault certainly. But hoping I could recover, and in the process
learning a bit more about how the structure can get damaged, and hence
understand better how it all works.
Will have to run the full pkg_add -u, under current conditions, later
today, as I have to run across the border shortly.
If it becomes probable that I am wasting you folks time with too unique a
circumstance feel free to say so.
Meanwhile, I really appreciate such shared insights as helps my general
orientation.
Regards,
Austin
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020, Solene Rapenne wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 09:32:53 -0600 (MDT)
Austin Hook <aus...@computershop.ca>:
Here's the output of pkg_check
farm# pkg_check
Packing-list sanity: ok
Direct dependencies: ok
--- gcj-4.9.4p12 -------------------
dependency lang/gcc/4.9,-main:gcc->=4.9,<4.10:gcc-4.9.4p12 does not match
any installed package
Reverse dependencies: ok
Files from packages: ok
gcj is non existent in 6.6, it was removed. The removal reason
should be displayed as the last line of pkg_add -u output IIRC.
Are you sure you did run pkg_add -u and it worked correctly?
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2020/07/29 09:36, Austin Hook wrote:
Probably got my packages messed up at some point, and should just stop
doing endless "upgrades", and start clean with 6.7, but for learning
purposes and perspective, would appreciate tips on why doing a pkg_add of
firefox under 6.6 would fail, while looking for a version of atk that that
is not in the packages for 6.6?
farm# pkg_add firefox
quirks-3.187 signed on 2020-05-19T14:41:48Z
Can't install firefox-72.0.2 because of libraries
|library atk-1.0.21809.3 not found
...
But looking at:
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fftp.openbsd.org%2Fpub%2FOpenBSD%2F6.6%2Fpackages%2Famd64%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C91f1b235ffd046b4552808d834b46c28%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637317296792770540&sdata=E%2F4Ryl17kjd%2FF%2BQoCD7pKZm%2BMVmNUIzb1YizcLLgvm4%3D&reserved=0
I only see: atk-2.... and no atk-1....
atk-1.0.21809.3 reported by pkg_add in the "library not found" line refers
to the library version (file /usr/local/lib/libatk-1.0.so.21809.3) not the
package version (this library is contained in the atk-2.32.0 package).
-------------------------- <clip> ----------------------
at-spi2-core-2.32.1.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 258681
atari800-4.1.0.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 408617
atf-0.18p3.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 1129085
atk-2.32.0.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 461597
atk2mm-2.28.0.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 1238387
atlas-0.4.3.1p10.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 2360270
atomicparsley-0.9.6p3.tgz 12-Oct-2019 06:06 138835
--------------------------- </clip> -----------------------
I realize that there are dependencies of dependencies going on here. but
for perspective, why wouldn't atk-1... exist in the same package
repository as the 6.6 version of firefox does, if that version (or
probably it's other dependencies) requires it. Wouldn't package testing
have failed for firefox when it was tested for 6.6? And if not, why not?
Thanks in advance, for any comment.
Austin Hook
Could you show the full output from these please?
echo $PKG_PATH
cat /etc/installurl
pkg_add -u
pkg_info
