ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

Allan · 2008-10-06 23:16:15

Due to a limitation in pacman's conflict checking and symbolic link resolution, the upgrade to klibc-1.5.14-1 requires manual removal of a symbolic link befole updating. Please run the command "rm /usr/lib/klibc/include/asm" as root to remove the symbolic link that will otherwise cause a few hundred false file conflicts.

Misfit138 · 2008-10-06 23:30:06

Stickying for the foreseeable future.

catwell · 2008-10-06 23:59:38

Wouldn't it have been possible to do this in pre_install ?

toofishes · 2008-10-07 00:20:27

catwell wrote:

Wouldn't it have been possible to do this in pre_install ?

No. File conflict checks run before anything is installed. pre_install would actually never run in this case, I think you are looking for pre_upgrade, and that only runs right before the package is set to be upgraded, not at the beginning of all packages where file conflict checks are done.

Xyne · 2008-10-07 00:48:57

Is there a warning in pacman about this when upgrading or do I need to keep this in mind?

catwell · 2008-10-07 00:50:07

toofishes wrote:

No. File conflict checks run before anything is installed. pre_install would actually never run in this case, I think you are looking for pre_upgrade, and that only runs right before the package is set to be upgraded, not at the beginning of all packages where file conflict checks are done.

Yes, I meant pre_upgrade. Thanks for the explanation.

Allan · 2008-10-07 00:59:06

Xyne wrote:

Is there a warning in pacman about this when upgrading or do I need to keep this in mind?

If you see klibc in the list of packages to be upgraded, then you need to remove the symlink. If you forget, you will be subtlety reminded with 349 file conflict messages

Xyne · 2008-10-07 01:05:30

Can't you make it conflict with one more? I like round numbers.

tigrmesh · 2008-10-07 01:08:40

Xyne wrote:

Is there a warning in pacman about this when upgrading or do I need to keep this in mind?

Don't worry, pacman showing you lots of file conflicts involving /usr/lib/klibc/include whatever will be your cue

NoOneImportant · 2008-10-07 05:17:52

thanks

just updated without a problem

Poisonblack · 2008-10-07 09:08:58

Ahh..this explains why -Syu failed on me this morning.;)

ahunavairya · 2008-10-07 09:46:02

I guess this has been my problem.

Out of curiosity why was the symbolic link there in the first place and what was its purpose?

dmz · 2008-10-07 12:24:15

Allright, before I saw the news regarding this on the frontpage, I just did pacman -Syuf, and it worked "fine". Or maybe I'm doomed now?

Allan · 2008-10-07 12:31:16

dmz wrote:

Allright, before I saw the news regarding this on the frontpage, I just did pacman -Syuf, and it worked "fine". Or maybe I'm doomed now?

No, you will be fine. But you should try very, very, very hard to never use the -f flag and instead find out why there is a conflict.

dmz · 2008-10-07 12:37:00

Allan wrote:

dmz wrote:
Allright, before I saw the news regarding this on the frontpage, I just did pacman -Syuf, and it worked "fine". Or maybe I'm doomed now?
No, you will be fine. But you should try very, very, very hard to never use the -f flag and instead find out why there is a conflict.

Allright, thanks.

moljac024 · 2008-10-07 12:47:16

Allan wrote:

dmz wrote:
Allright, before I saw the news regarding this on the frontpage, I just did pacman -Syuf, and it worked "fine". Or maybe I'm doomed now?
No, you will be fine. But you should try very, very, very hard to never use the -f flag and instead find out why there is a conflict.

OMG I've used -f a couple of times now! Is my machine doomed ?!

*jumps out the window*

dmz · 2008-10-07 12:48:54

moljac024 wrote:

Allan wrote:
dmz wrote:
Allright, before I saw the news regarding this on the frontpage, I just did pacman -Syuf, and it worked "fine". Or maybe I'm doomed now?
No, you will be fine. But you should try very, very, very hard to never use the -f flag and instead find out why there is a conflict.
OMG I've used -f a couple of times now! Is my machine doomed ?!
*jumps out the window*

I guess your machine is fine. You might be doomed though.

Last edited by dmz (2008-10-07 12:49:05)

fuscia · 2008-10-07 15:35:21

thanks.

derelict · 2008-10-07 15:52:08

Please note that in addition to removing the symlink, users must also include all the klibc packages during the upgrade. Pacman does not recognize the soname during dependency checks either. Please see http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/11330.

$sudo pacman -S klibc                                                                                                                                                     ~
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: klibc-extras: requires klibc-tQg242GqA9bO1EKgzWDvsh1E7nc
:: klibc-kbd: requires klibc-tQg242GqA9bO1EKgzWDvsh1E7nc
:: klibc-module-init-tools: requires klibc-tQg242GqA9bO1EKgzWDvsh1E7nc
:: klibc-udev: requires klibc-tQg242GqA9bO1EKgzWDvsh1E7nc

As opposed to this:

$sudo pacman -Syu                                                                                                                                                     ~
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core is up to date
 extra is up to date
 community is up to date
 kdemod is up to date
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...

Targets (8): udev-128-5  hal-0.5.11-4  initscripts-2008.09-2  klibc-1.5.14-1  klibc-extras-2.5-1  klibc-kbd-1.15.20080312-7  klibc-module-init-tools-3.4-2  
              klibc-udev-128-1

Dieter@be · 2008-10-07 17:31:03

klibc seems like a pretty fundamental library, why don't I have it? Is it only for people into writing their own initramfs etc?

B-Con · 2008-10-08 03:16:56

Dieter@be wrote:

klibc seems like a pretty fundamental library, why don't I have it? Is it only for people into writing their own initramfs etc?

Are you sure you don't have it?
$ pacman -Qi klibc
It's required by mkinitcpio. I don't think you're upgrading your kernel without it, unless you're do that manually. It's in [base], so I would think you have it.

Last edited by B-Con (2008-10-08 03:17:37)

burnside · 2008-10-08 14:24:12

Thanks for the heads up. My update went fine.

zombie_monkey · 2008-10-08 18:38:17

I just rm-oved the symlink and then the normal update went fine, should I have done somehitng else, derelict?

Dieter@be · 2008-10-08 19:12:01

B-Con wrote:

Dieter@be wrote:
klibc seems like a pretty fundamental library, why don't I have it? Is it only for people into writing their own initramfs etc?
Are you sure you don't have it?
$ pacman -Qi klibc
It's required by mkinitcpio. I don't think you're upgrading your kernel without it, unless you're do that manually. It's in [base], so I would think you have it.

Odd, it appears now in 'pacman -Syu' output where it didn't yesterday. Maybe repo lag...

Last edited by Dieter@be (2008-10-08 19:12:16)

Kobussie · 2008-10-08 21:13:27

Thanks Allen for the warning! Upgrade went fine after the rm of the symlink. - first upgrade after about one year...

Arch Linux

#1 2008-10-06 23:16:15

ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#2 2008-10-06 23:30:06

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#3 2008-10-06 23:59:38

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#4 2008-10-07 00:20:27

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#5 2008-10-07 00:48:57

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#6 2008-10-07 00:50:07

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#7 2008-10-07 00:59:06

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#8 2008-10-07 01:05:30

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#9 2008-10-07 01:08:40

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#10 2008-10-07 05:17:52

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#11 2008-10-07 09:08:58

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#12 2008-10-07 09:46:02

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#13 2008-10-07 12:24:15

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#14 2008-10-07 12:31:16

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#15 2008-10-07 12:37:00

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#16 2008-10-07 12:47:16

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#17 2008-10-07 12:48:54

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#18 2008-10-07 15:35:21

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#19 2008-10-07 15:52:08

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#20 2008-10-07 17:31:03

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#21 2008-10-08 03:16:56

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#22 2008-10-08 14:24:12

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#23 2008-10-08 18:38:17

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#24 2008-10-08 19:12:01

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

#25 2008-10-08 21:13:27

Re: ATTENTION ALL USERS:klibc upgrade requires user intervention

Board footer