filesystem-2012.6-2

Daerun · 2012-06-08 07:40:57

So, as stated here:

http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesyste … equired-1/

should we perform "# pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force" EVERY time we update our sistem, until next version of filesistem?

Last edited by Daerun (2012-06-22 21:55:56)

theGunslinger · 2012-06-08 07:54:21

Just update normally and read the news.

Allan · 2012-06-08 08:12:05

Only once.

Psykorgasm · 2012-06-08 08:46:45

If you used an up to date mirror you would only have to do it once, I had the package come through to my system about 10 minutes after it got listed on the site.
If you do that command every time you will just constantly be forcing a re-install of the filesystem package.

Daerun · 2012-06-08 14:19:33

I am asking because I performed the "--ignore filesystem etc" thing a couple of days ago (already had the /var/lock and /var/run symlinks), but this morning when I pacman -Syu, filesystem-2012.6-2 appeared again to be updated, and that confuses me a bit. As I understand it, now I have to normally update it?

Inxsible · 2012-06-08 14:35:38

Yes it was only this time. You can't have that much fun everytime you update

benjamin.w · 2012-06-14 12:47:51

Hi. I hope my question isn't too dumb, but here it is:
I updated according to the newspost, and when I update normally again, the package shows up again.
My problem is, the update does finish with

error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem
filesystem: /var/run exists in filesystem
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

What did I do wrong?

2ManyDogs · 2012-06-14 12:50:40

Did you follow the instructions for upgrading the filesystem? What do you have now at /var/run and /var/lock?

Last edited by 2ManyDogs (2012-06-14 12:55:25)

benjamin.w · 2012-06-14 13:01:37

I followed the instructions step by step. Before upgrading they were already symlinks.
running "ls -la" printed this:

lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root     9 Apr  6 22:08 lock -> /run/lock
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root     4 Apr  6 22:08 run -> /run

which is what they are now, too, btw.

the command i ran is

pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force

then I restarted and then i tried to run an udpate with "pacman -Syyu"

Edit:
Sorry, didn't quite catch your meaning there...

Contents of /var/run

benjamin run $ ls -la
total 36
drwxr-xr-x 17 root root  520 Jun 14 14:51 .
drwxr-xr-x 21 root root 4096 May  5 22:53 ..
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   60 Jun 14 14:33 console
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   80 Jun 14 14:33 ConsoleKit
-rw-r--r--  1 root root    4 Jun 14 14:32 crond.pid
----------  1 root root    0 Jun 14 14:32 cron.reboot
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  120 Jun 14 14:32 daemons
drwxr-xr-x  2 dbus dbus   60 Jun 14 14:32 dbus
-rw-r--r--  1 root root    4 Jun 14 14:32 dbus.pid
-rw-r--r--  1 root root    4 Jun 14 14:32 dhcpcd-eth0.pid
drwx--x--x  4 root gdm    80 Jun 14 14:33 gdm
-rw-r--r--  1 root root    4 Jun 14 14:32 gdm.pid
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   60 Jun 14 14:32 initramfs
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   40 Jun 14 14:32 lock
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   60 Jun 14 14:32 mount
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   40 Jun 14 14:32 NetworkManager
-rw-r--r--  1 root root    3 Jun 14 14:32 NetworkManager.pid
drwxr-xr-x  4 root root   80 Jun 14 14:33 pm-utils
srwxr-xr-x  1 root root    0 Jun 14 14:32 syslog-ng.ctl
-rw-r--r--  1 root root    4 Jun 14 14:32 syslog-ng.pid
drwxr-xr-x  7 root root  140 Jun 14 14:32 systemd
drwxr-xr-x  6 root root  160 Jun 14 14:36 udev
drwx------  2 root root   40 Jun 14 14:33 udisks
drwx------  2 root root   40 Jun 14 14:51 udisks2
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root   40 Jun 14 14:32 user
-rw-rw-r--  1 root utmp 4992 Jun 14 14:34 utmp

/var/lock is empty

Last edited by benjamin.w (2012-06-14 13:13:29)

Daerun · 2012-06-22 21:57:31

Alright, I am unmarking this as not solved again because I have found the same problem as benjamin, with exactly the same messages and the same content in /var/run (being it a symlink and not a folder)

algenon · 2012-06-24 19:07:29

I have exactly the same problem. I followed the upgrade steps in [http://www.archlinux.org/news/filesyste … equired-1/] and after two attempted updates (pacman -Syu), I get the message:

filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem
filesystem: /var/run exists in filesystem

The output of ls -al from in /var is:

[alan@brittany9 var]$ ls -al
total 52
drwxr-xr-x 13 root root  4096 Jun  7 17:53 .
drwxr-xr-x 21 root root  4096 Jun  7 17:53 ..
drwxr-xr-x  7 root root  4096 Dec  3  2011 cache
drwxr-xr-x  3 root root  4096 Apr  4 19:34 db
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  4096 Feb 20 21:24 empty
drwxrwxr-x  2 root games 4096 May  2 12:49 games
drwxr-xr-x 25 root root  4096 Jun  7 17:52 lib
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  4096 May  2 12:49 local
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root     9 Dec 29 09:39 lock -> /run/lock
drwxr-xr-x  5 root root  4096 Jun 24 17:21 log
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root    10 May  2 12:49 mail -> spool/mail
drwx------  3 root root  4096 Mar 10 11:12 net-snmp
drwxr-xr-x  2 root root  4096 May  2 12:49 opt
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root     4 Dec 29 09:39 run -> /run
drwxr-xr-x  7 root root  4096 Jun  7 17:53 spool
drwxrwxrwt  8 root root  4096 Jun 24 19:56 tmp

.

Regards,

Algenon.

pauper · 2012-06-25 16:30:23

I have the same problem as benjamin.w, Daerun and algenon. /var/run and /var/lock were symlinked so I ran the first command:

pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force

after all the packages are upgraded it outputs:

error: you cannot perform this operation unless you are root.

Subsequent attempts to upgrade produce:

pacman -Syu

error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)
filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem
filesystem: /var/run exists in filesystem
Errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.

mcloaked · 2012-06-25 16:57:05

Yes you should be doing that as root!

pauper · 2012-06-25 17:09:20

All pacman operations were done as root, packages were upgraded as stated. I don't know what the error message is referring to.

pauper · 2012-06-25 17:22:36

Apologies, except for the one after the && operator. I don't know how I missed that.

algenon · 2012-06-25 19:40:33

I have just repeated

 pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem && pacman -S filesystem --force

as root and the upgrade was ok. The first time I did it as sudo and that could have been the cause of my problem.

Thanks for your help.

Algenon.

aash29 · 2012-07-04 11:44:46

Also getting

filesystem: /var/lock exists in filesystem
filesystem: /var/run exists in filesystem

after doing --force filesystem on previous upgrade. Will this go away eventually?

EDIT: Sorry, noticed the missing sudo after &&. Everything seems to be ok now.

Last edited by aash29 (2012-07-05 07:23:34)

Convergence · 2012-07-18 04:04:29

Weird. I really thought that I had the same problem that was being described here. However, I've _never_ used sudo on this machine, and the problem persists.

Edit:

In fact, this problem was complicated by the similar glibc issue. I had to:

pacman -Syu --ignore filesystem,glibc && pacman -S filesystem --force
pacman -Su

All as root :)

Last edited by Convergence (2012-07-18 04:16:45)

Mocco · 2012-09-07 14:30:51

I have to upgrade the filesystem package too, should I copy /var/run and /var/lock content in /run and /run/lock directories before running pacman with the --force flag? That command will erase my directories content.....

Arch Linux

#1 2012-06-08 07:40:57

filesystem-2012.6-2

#2 2012-06-08 07:54:21

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#3 2012-06-08 08:12:05

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#4 2012-06-08 08:46:45

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#5 2012-06-08 14:19:33

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#6 2012-06-08 14:35:38

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#7 2012-06-14 12:47:51

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#8 2012-06-14 12:50:40

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#9 2012-06-14 13:01:37

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#10 2012-06-22 21:57:31

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#11 2012-06-24 19:07:29

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#12 2012-06-25 16:30:23

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#13 2012-06-25 16:57:05

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#14 2012-06-25 17:09:20

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#15 2012-06-25 17:22:36

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#16 2012-06-25 19:40:33

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#17 2012-07-04 11:44:46

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#18 2012-07-18 04:04:29

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

#19 2012-09-07 14:30:51

Re: filesystem-2012.6-2

Board footer