You are not logged in.

#26 2013-06-03 14:41:47

hcra
Member
From: Oregon
Registered: 2013-04-20
Posts: 56

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Scimmia wrote:

Do you have bash in IgnorePkg in /etc/pacman.conf? If so, why?

Perhaps I'm confused (not surprising!) but in step 5 there are two packages ignored

pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem,bash

Offline

#27 2013-06-03 14:43:39

CrashLog
Member
From: Finland
Registered: 2013-01-13
Posts: 133

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

While nothing seems to have broken on my system after updating and following the instructions, is there something I should (or could) do to make sure that I did everything right?


"There are no problems, only opportunities for solutions."

Offline

#28 2013-06-03 14:43:41

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Right, that is correct as the next step is to upgrade bash. The warning is for things you have set to be ignored in /etc/pacman.conf

Offline

#29 2013-06-03 14:43:45

HalosGhost
Member
From: Twin Cities, MN
Registered: 2012-06-22
Posts: 1,486
Website

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

hcra wrote:
pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem,bash

This command tells pacman to not upgrade those two packages this time. IgnorePkg and IgnoreGroup are pacman.conf options (which you shouldn't touch unless you know what you're doing). That you are telling pacman to not upgrade those packages this time is unrelated to the IgnorePkg and IgnoreGroup step.

All the best,

-HG


"All errors are ᴘᴇʙᴋᴀᴄ errors—It's just a matter of narrowing down which keyboard and chair." -Trilby
\ldots

Offline

#30 2013-06-03 14:44:31

HalosGhost
Member
From: Twin Cities, MN
Registered: 2012-06-22
Posts: 1,486
Website

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

CrashLog wrote:

While nothing seems to have broken on my system after updating and following the instructions, is there something I should (or could) do to make sure that I did everything right?

Reboot?

All the best,

-HG


"All errors are ᴘᴇʙᴋᴀᴄ errors—It's just a matter of narrowing down which keyboard and chair." -Trilby
\ldots

Offline

#31 2013-06-03 14:45:11

CrashLog
Member
From: Finland
Registered: 2013-01-13
Posts: 133

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

That was the first thing I did afterwards.


"There are no problems, only opportunities for solutions."

Offline

#32 2013-06-03 14:45:24

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

CrashLog wrote:

While nothing seems to have broken on my system after updating and following the instructions, is there something I should (or could) do to make sure that I did everything right?

If the upgrade didn't complain, you should be fine. If you want to check just do:
ls -l /
ls -l /usr
/bin and /sbin should be symlinked to usr/bin and /usr/sbin should be symlinked to bin

Last edited by Scimmia (2013-06-03 14:45:55)

Offline

#33 2013-06-03 14:45:39

HalosGhost
Member
From: Twin Cities, MN
Registered: 2012-06-22
Posts: 1,486
Website

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

CrashLog wrote:

That was the first thing I did afterwards.

Sounds like it went fine then.

All the best,

-HG


"All errors are ᴘᴇʙᴋᴀᴄ errors—It's just a matter of narrowing down which keyboard and chair." -Trilby
\ldots

Offline

#34 2013-06-03 14:47:19

CrashLog
Member
From: Finland
Registered: 2013-01-13
Posts: 133

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Scimmia wrote:
CrashLog wrote:

While nothing seems to have broken on my system after updating and following the instructions, is there something I should (or could) do to make sure that I did everything right?

If the upgrade didn't complain, you should be fine. If you want to check just do:
ls -l /
ls -l /usr
/bin and /sbin should be symlinked to usr/bin and /usr/sbin should be symlinked to bin

And that they are. Thanks.

Last edited by CrashLog (2013-06-03 14:48:24)


"There are no problems, only opportunities for solutions."

Offline

#35 2013-06-03 14:47:41

hcra
Member
From: Oregon
Registered: 2013-04-20
Posts: 56

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

HalosGhost wrote:

unless you know what you're doing

As you might imagine, I haven't ignored packages or groups in the pacman.conf, since clearly, I don't know what I'm doing smile
Thanks!!

Offline

#36 2013-06-03 14:57:34

errikosd
Member
From: Athens, Greece
Registered: 2013-04-19
Posts: 17

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Hello all!

I am also having a nice little problem with the whole procedure.

What I did is, I moved all the contents of /bin and /sbin to /usr/bin, then actually deleted the two folders and created 2 symlinks: /bin -> /usr/bin and /sbin -> /usr/bin.

$ ls /bin
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Ιούν  3 17:02 /bin -> usr/bin/
$ ls /sbin
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 7 Ιούν  3 17:02 /sbin -> usr/bin/

The problem is, pacman upgrade fails by telling me:

filesystem: /bin exists in filesystem
filesystem: /sbin exists in filesystem

and the curious thing is this output:

$ pacman -Qqo /bin /sbin /usr/sbin | pacman -Qm -
error: No package owns /bin
error: No package owns /sbin

I understand that I have done something wrong, but cannot yet figure out what and, most importantly, how to fix that.

On an attempt to fix this, I found out that there were some broken symlinks in the moved files still pointing to /bin and /sbin, which I fixed.

Any help appreciated! smile

Thanks.

Last edited by errikosd (2013-06-03 14:59:48)

Offline

#37 2013-06-03 15:00:18

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

The filesystem package contains the symlinks, you're not supposed to create them yourself let alone move everything manually. Seriously, did you read the front page news?

Last edited by Scimmia (2013-06-03 15:00:57)

Offline

#38 2013-06-03 15:02:43

HalosGhost
Member
From: Twin Cities, MN
Registered: 2012-06-22
Posts: 1,486
Website

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Scimmia wrote:

The filesystem package contains the symlinks, you're not supposed to create them yourself let alone move everything manually. Seriously, did you read the front page news?

I feel like I know the answer to your question…

All the best,

-HG


"All errors are ᴘᴇʙᴋᴀᴄ errors—It's just a matter of narrowing down which keyboard and chair." -Trilby
\ldots

Offline

#39 2013-06-03 15:09:49

Sr. Ssruno
Member
From: Asunción, Paraguay
Registered: 2011-04-27
Posts: 12

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

HalosGhost wrote:
Sr. Ssruno wrote:

Thank you HalosGhost, but I'm not quite sure how to "fix it", that's why I am asking how to do it. roll

EDIT:
Because the "fix" that I made, was just moving the files...

See what Scimmia wrote:

The filesystem package is correct, it can own that dir as it will be replaced by a symlink owned by that package so pacman is fine with it. The problem is the other two. If they use autotools, it's usually as simple as adding --sbindir=/usr/bin to the configure command.

He's referring here to the configure command used in the PKGBUILD for the package (assuming they use autotools). If they don't, then it may require modifying some install commands or even possibly modifying the Makefile (easiest, I find, through sed substitutions in a prepare function).

But yeah, TL;DR == You fix it by rebuilding the package.

All the best,

-HG

Thank you HalosGhost, sincerely I'm not familiar with the procedure. Could you give me some orientation to begin my research?
PS: I made a workaround, I uninstalled both packages and then updated with pacman -Su

Offline

#40 2013-06-03 15:10:58

errikosd
Member
From: Athens, Greece
Registered: 2013-04-19
Posts: 17

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Scimmia wrote:

The filesystem package contains the symlinks, you're not supposed to create them yourself let alone move everything manually. Seriously, did you read the front page news?

Seriously, I did, but as far as I can see, there is no such a note there (well, there is also no note that tells that I was supposed to, but ehh)...

Anyway, my mistake, all set, thanks.

Offline

#41 2013-06-03 15:13:30

hcra
Member
From: Oregon
Registered: 2013-04-20
Posts: 56

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Running step 3, which aims to upgrade filesystem returns

[root@arch steve]# pacman -Su
:: Starting full system upgrade...
 there is nothing to do

But, querying the package manager shows

pacman -Qs filesystem
local/cifs-utils 6.0-2
    CIFS filesystem user-space tools
local/dosfstools 3.0.17-1
    DOS filesystem utilities
local/e2fsprogs 1.42.7-1 (base)
    Ext2/3/4 filesystem utilities
local/filesystem 2013.03-2 (base)
    Base filesystem
local/fuse 2.9.2-1
    A library that makes it possible to implement a filesystem in a userspace
    program.
local/gvfs 1.16.2-1
    Userspace virtual filesystem implemented as a pluggable module for gio
local/jfsutils 1.1.15-4 (base)
    JFS filesystem utilities
local/ntfs-3g 2013.1.13-3
    NTFS filesystem utilities
local/syslinux 4.06-2
    Collection of boot loaders that boot from FAT, ext2/3/4 and btrfs
    filesystems, from CDs and via PXE
local/xfsprogs 3.1.11-1 (base)
    XFS filesystem utilities

As you can see, things are going in the wrong direction, since the new filemanager packages have not been upgrade. For the sake of completeness, my /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist includes several servers up and down the street from my connection:

cat /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
##
## Arch Linux repository mirrorlist
## Sorted by mirror score from mirror status page
## Generated on 2013-04-01
##

Server = http://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/archlinux/$repo/os/$arch
Server = http://mirrors.cat.pdx.edu/archlinux/$repo/os/$arch
Server = http://mirrors.lax1.thegcloud.com/arch/$repo/os/$arch
Server = http://archlinux.supsec.org/$repo/os/$arch

If I understand correctly, I've (unintentionally) done a partial upgrade. Now what? Wait ...

Offline

#42 2013-06-03 15:15:15

HalosGhost
Member
From: Twin Cities, MN
Registered: 2012-06-22
Posts: 1,486
Website

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Sr. Ssruno wrote:

Thank you HalosGhost, sincerely I'm not familiar with the procedure. Could you give me some orientation to begin my research?
PS: I made a workaround, I uninstalled both packages and then updated with pacman -Su

Yes, have two.

All the best,

-HG


"All errors are ᴘᴇʙᴋᴀᴄ errors—It's just a matter of narrowing down which keyboard and chair." -Trilby
\ldots

Offline

#43 2013-06-03 15:15:19

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

hcra, it could be a problem with your repo databases. Try pacman -Syyu

Last edited by Scimmia (2013-06-03 15:16:42)

Offline

#44 2013-06-03 15:17:37

hcra
Member
From: Oregon
Registered: 2013-04-20
Posts: 56

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Scimmia wrote:

hcra, it could be a problem with your repo databases. Try pacman -Syyu

I agree, but

sudo pacman -Syyu
[sudo] password for steve: 
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core                     103.7 KiB   943K/s 00:00 [######################] 100%
 extra                   1431.7 KiB  3.04M/s 00:00 [######################] 100%
 community               1944.6 KiB  2.99M/s 00:01 [######################] 100%
 multilib                 104.1 KiB  1108K/s 00:00 [######################] 100%
:: Starting full system upgrade...
 there is nothing to do

Offline

#45 2013-06-03 15:18:17

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

How about pacman -Q filesystem? What version do you have installed?

Last edited by Scimmia (2013-06-03 15:19:42)

Offline

#46 2013-06-03 15:19:19

hcra
Member
From: Oregon
Registered: 2013-04-20
Posts: 56

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Scimmia wrote:

How about pacman -Q filesystem? What version do you have installed?

[steve@arch ~]$ pacman -Q filesystem
filesystem 2013.03-2

Offline

#47 2013-06-03 15:20:12

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

Yeah, I should have seen that from the first output. Anyway, try just pacman -S filesystem and see if it upgrades.

Offline

#48 2013-06-03 15:20:48

stqn
Member
Registered: 2010-03-19
Posts: 1,189
Website

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

hcra wrote:

If I understand correctly, I've (unintentionally) done a partial upgrade. Now what? Wait ...

If you followed the instructions correctly, then I guess your mirror isn’t up to date and doesn’t have the new filesystem package yet.
I used the "http://mir.archlinux.fr/$repo/os/$arch" mirror to do the update and it worked fine.

Offline

#49 2013-06-03 15:23:25

hcra
Member
From: Oregon
Registered: 2013-04-20
Posts: 56

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

stqn wrote:

If you followed the instructions correctly, then I guess your mirror isn’t up to date and doesn’t have the new filesystem package yet.

I've noticed before the mirrors on the US West Coast often lag several hours behind the list of official updated packages. I should have waited longer. Thanks.

Offline

#50 2013-06-03 15:34:08

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 5,326

Re: Binaries move to /usr/bin requiring update intervention

errikosd wrote:
Scimmia wrote:

The filesystem package contains the symlinks, you're not supposed to create them yourself let alone move everything manually. Seriously, did you read the front page news?

Seriously, I did, but as far as I can see, there is no such a note there (well, there is also no note that tells that I was supposed to, but ehh)...

Anyway, my mistake, all set, thanks.

The news didn't tell you not to run "sudo rm -rf /" either.

Edit at mod request: DO NOT RUN THIS COMMAND, it will completely destroy your system. This post was meant to point out that just because a news post didn't specifically say not to do something doesn't mean it's a good idea to do it.

Last edited by Scimmia (2013-06-03 15:57:46)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB