You are not logged in.

Pages: 1

#1 2012-03-27 12:44:00

nadinengland
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2012-03-27
Posts: 4

"pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

Good afternoon all,

The robot/human filter that this forum uses is utterly sublime. It has very much amused my colleagues and I.

After installing a fresh version of Arch Linux 2010.05 i686 I tried to use pacman to install sudo. This failed with:

# pacman -S sudo
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...

Targets (1): sudo-1.7.2p7-1  

Total Download Size:    0.10 MB
Total Installed Size:   0.32 MB

Proceed with installation? [Y/n] Y
:: Retrieving packages from core...
error: failed retrieving file 'sudo-1.7.2p7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' from mirrors.kernel.org : File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access)
error: failed retrieving file 'sudo-1.7.2p7-1-i686.pkg.tar.xz' from mirrors.kernel.org : Not Found
warning: failed to retrieve some files from core
error: failed to commit transaction (Not Found)
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

Searching through through the forums lead me to believe that I required to resync my package database's:

# pacman -Syyu

This noticed that pacman needed upgrading, which resulted in packages being downloaded.

# pacman -Syyu
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core                     104.9K  180.4K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 extra                   1383.4K  943.6K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 community               1645.3K 1008.1K/s 00:00:02 [#####################] 100%
:: The following packages should be upgraded first :
    pacman
:: Do you want to cancel the current operation
:: and upgrade these packages now? [Y/n] Y

resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...

Targets (20): linux-api-headers-3.1.6-1  glibc-2.15-7  xz-5.0.3-1  
              libarchive-3.0.3-5  run-parts-4.2.1-1  
              ca-certificates-20120212-1  libssh2-1.4.0-1  curl-7.25.0-1  
              pth-2.0.7-4  libsasl-2.1.23-9  libldap-2.4.28-2  
              libusb-compat-0.1.3-2  gnupg-1.4.12-1  libksba-1.2.0-1  
              libassuan-2.0.3-1  pinentry-0.8.1-3  dirmngr-1.1.0-3  
              gnupg2-2.0.18-1  gpgme-1.3.1-2  pacman-4.0.2-1  

Total Download Size:    14.26 MB
Total Installed Size:   64.34 MB

Proceed with installation? [Y/n] Y
:: Retrieving packages from core...
 linux-api-headers-3...   579.3K  495.6K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 glibc-2.15-7-i686.p...     7.3M    2.5M/s 00:00:03 [#####################] 100%
 xz-5.0.3-1-i686          324.3K  370.9K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 libarchive-3.0.3-5-...   608.2K  506.5K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 run-parts-4.2.1-1-i...    16.7K  115.1K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
 ca-certificates-201...   127.0K   72.8K/s 00:00:02 [#####################] 100%
 libssh2-1.4.0-1-i68...   202.1K  275.9K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 curl-7.25.0-1-i686....   559.9K  478.5K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 pth-2.0.7-4-i686.pk...    76.2K  175.2K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
 libsasl-2.1.23-9-i6...   115.4K  197.9K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 libldap-2.4.28-2-i6...   402.1K  391.6K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 libusb-compat-0.1.3...    13.6K   89.9K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
 gnupg-1.4.12-1-i686...  1020.0K  700.1K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 libksba-1.2.0-1-i68...   110.8K  189.5K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 libassuan-2.0.3-1-i...    77.1K  175.7K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
 pinentry-0.8.1-3-i6...    92.4K  211.8K/s 00:00:00 [#####################] 100%
 dirmngr-1.1.0-3-i68...   160.9K  219.9K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 gnupg2-2.0.18-1-i68...  1405.5K  963.0K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 gpgme-1.3.1-2-i686....   206.5K  283.2K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 pacman-4.0.2-1-i686     1027.2K  779.3K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
checking package integrity...
(20/20) checking for file conflicts                 [#####################] 100%
error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
libusb-compat: /usr/bin/libusb-config exists in filesystem
libusb-compat: /usr/include/usb.h exists in filesystem
libusb-compat: /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 exists in filesystem
libusb-compat: /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4.4.4 exists in filesystem
libusb-compat: /usr/lib/libusb.a exists in filesystem
libusb-compat: /usr/lib/libusb.so exists in filesystem
libusb-compat: /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc exists in filesystem
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

This ended in conflicts which, according to the wiki, are by design; you are responsible for the management of your own packages. Running pacman -Qo /path/to/file should inform me of the package owner, which I would expect to be pacman.

# pacman -Qo /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4
/usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 is owned by libusb 0.1.12-4

As you can see it appears to be under ownership of a similar named package. Is this correct and if so am I okay to rename them as the wiki suggest, excepting pacman to remove them during the update? Or I am totally doing this wrong? For the record I am using the following  documentation to get to grips with Arch: Beginner's Guide, the Pacman Wiki and the Sudo Wiki.

TL;DR Should "pacman -Qo /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4" tell me "/usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 is owned by libusb 0.1.12-4"?

Offline

#2 2012-03-27 14:11:38

TheHebes
Member
From: New England
Registered: 2011-07-07
Posts: 138

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

You should be fine renaming the file. Just don't remove it. mv it to something similar (give it a .old extension or something).

Laptops:
MSI GS60 Ghost
Asus Zenbook Pro UX501VW
Lenovo Thinkpad X120e

Offline

#3 2012-03-27 14:37:22

nadinengland
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2012-03-27
Posts: 4

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

Cheers TheHebes, sadly I can't confirm whether this was successful for me or not. I re-ran "pacman -Syyu" and now things have gone berserk:

# pacman -Syyu
:: Synchronizing package databases...
 core                     104.0K  179.1K/s 00:00:01 [#####################] 100%
 extra                   1384.1K  865.2K/s 00:00:02 [#####################################################] 100%
 community               1645.2K 1026.5K/s 00:00:02 [#####################################################] 100%
:: The following packages should be upgraded first :
    pacman  
:: Do you want to cancel the current operation
:: and upgrade these packages now? [Y/n] Y

resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...

Targets (18): linux-api-headers-3.1.6-1  glibc-2.15-7  xz-5.0.3-1  libarchive-3.0.3-5  run-parts-4.2.1-1  
              ca-certificates-20120212-1  libssh2-1.4.0-1  curl-7.25.0-1  pth-2.0.7-4  libksba-1.2.0-1  
              libassuan-2.0.3-1  pinentry-0.8.1-3  libsasl-2.1.23-9  libldap-2.4.28-2  dirmngr-1.1.0-3  
              gnupg-2.0.18-2  gpgme-1.3.1-4  pacman-4.0.2-1  

Total Download Size:    1.58 MB
Total Installed Size:   59.37 MB

Proceed with installation? [Y/n] Y
:: Retrieving packages from core...
 gnupg-2.0.18-2-i686...  1408.4K  914.9K/s 00:00:02 [#####################################################] 100%
 gpgme-1.3.1-4-i686....   205.6K  282.6K/s 00:00:01 [#####################################################] 100%
checking package integrity...
(18/18) checking for file conflicts                 [#####################################################] 100%
( 1/18) upgrading linux-api-headers                 [#####################################################] 100%
( 2/18) upgrading glibc                             [#####################################################] 100%
warning: /etc/locale.gen installed as /etc/locale.gen.pacnew
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
( 3/18) upgrading xz                                [#####################################################] 100%
( 4/18) upgrading libarchive                        [#####################################################] 100%
( 5/18) installing run-parts                        [#####################################################] 100%
( 6/18) installing ca-certificates                  [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
( 7/18) installing libssh2                          [#####################################################] 100%
( 8/18) installing curl                             [#####################################################] 100%
( 9/18) installing pth                              [#####################################################] 100%
(10/18) installing libksba                          [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
(11/18) installing libassuan                        [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
(12/18) installing pinentry                         [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
Optional dependencies for pinentry
    gtk2: for gtk2 backend
    qt: for qt4 backend
(13/18) installing libsasl                          [#####################################################] 100%
(14/18) installing libldap                          [#####################################################] 100%
(15/18) installing dirmngr                          [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
(16/18) installing gnupg                            [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
Optional dependencies for gnupg
    curl: gpg2keys_curl
    libldap: gpg2keys_ldap
    libusb-compat: scdaemon
    texinfo: documentation
(17/18) installing gpgme                            [#####################################################] 100%
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
(18/18) upgrading pacman                            [#####################################################] 100%
warning: /etc/pacman.conf installed as /etc/pacman.conf.pacnew
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly
FATAL: kernel too old
error: command failed to execute correctly

But this is deviating from the topic of the thread. I'll be back when this is resolved.

Edit: The box won't even boot now. I have no idea what I did, but it must have been bad.

Last edited by nadinengland (2012-03-27 14:45:39)

Offline

#4 2012-03-27 14:59:56

x33a
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2009-08-15
Posts: 4,587

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

nadinengland wrote:

TL;DR Should "pacman -Qo /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4" tell me "/usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 is owned by libusb 0.1.12-4"?

since you hadn't updated your system, it was shown as belonging to libusb, now it's owned by libusb-compat, and hence the conflict occurred.

As for your current problem, take a look at this thread.

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 43#p982143

Offline

#5 2012-03-27 15:18:12

.:B:.
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2006-11-26
Posts: 5,819
Website

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

If your installation is still fresh, you might want to reinstall using the latest ISO, especially if you did not use a netinstall one but a full ISO. The pacman 4 upgrade can be a bit nasty.

Got Leenucks? :: Arch: Power in simplicity :: Get Counted! Registered Linux User #392717 :: Blog thingy

Offline

#6 2012-03-27 16:00:41

x33a
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2009-08-15
Posts: 4,587

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

.:B:. wrote:

If your installation is still fresh, you might want to reinstall using the latest ISO, especially if you did not use a netinstall one but a full ISO. The pacman 4 upgrade can be a bit nasty.

+1

You can also try a latest one from https://releng.archlinux.org/isos/

Offline

#7 2012-03-27 16:31:51

nadinengland
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2012-03-27
Posts: 4

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

Unfortunately that doesn't appear to be an option as it is running on a VPS. The provider, bhost.net, only have a couple of Arch Templates. I will put a ticket in to see if they want to support the later builds.

In the mean time I can pretty rapidly (under a minute) re-image the box so it's not a big deal this early on.

I've had another perusal of the forums and some threads (uno, due) lead me to believe that the minimum required kernel version increase back in 2010 is the root of my problem.

To go back to the title of the thread, imagine pacman -Syyu had of initially worked without the errors I witnessed. Prior to executing that would "pacman -Qo /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4" have told me "/usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 is owned by pacman"?

Offline

#8 2012-03-27 16:37:45

x33a
Forum Fellow
Registered: 2009-08-15
Posts: 4,587

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

nadinengland wrote:

To go back to the title of the thread, imagine pacman -Syyu had of initially worked without the errors I witnessed. Prior to executing that would "pacman -Qo /usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4" have told me "/usr/lib/libusb-0.1.so.4 is owned by pacman"?

Perhaps you don't understand what pacman -Qo <path-to-file> does. It tells you the package the file belongs to.

So libusb-0.1.so.4 will neve be shown as belonging to pacman.

To see a package's contents use 

pacman -Ql <pkgname>

For example to see all files belonging to pacman

pacman -Ql pacman

Offline

#9 2012-03-27 16:54:37

nadinengland
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2012-03-27
Posts: 4

Re: "pacman -Qo" Package Owner Confusion

Yes I wasn't entirely confident of its functionality. I think as pacman was wanting to update it I assumed that it would be the owner of the file. From the wiki, this line gave me the assumption:

A safe way is to first check if another package owns the file (pacman -Qo /path/to/file).

Thanks for your clarification, I'll give it another shot, this time without delay!

Offline

Pages: 1

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB