Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

LorenAmelang · 2023-11-01 20:43:54

See: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/80134

I just installed, for the first time on this machine:
pacman -S -i qgis
Repository : extra
Name : qgis
Version : 3.34.0-1

It fails immediately with
qgis: error while loading shared libraries: libabsl_log_internal_check_op.so.2308.0.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

My system had libabsl_log_internal_check_op.so.2301.0.0

After installing the 2308 version it initially wanted, it now fails with:

qgis: error while loading shared libraries: libabsl_log_internal_check_op.so.2301.0.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

The maintainer instantly closed my report, with:

Closed by Antonio Rojas (arojas)
Wednesday, 01 November 2023, 11:51 GMT-8
Reason for closing: Not a bug
Additional comments about closing: Partial upgrades are not supported. Please use the support channels if you need help.

So I need help! How can an instant failure of a fresh current install not be a bug?

What does "Partial upgrades are not supported" mean?

Why would the program revert to looking for the library version it previously said it couldn't use?

Last edited by LorenAmelang (2023-11-02 21:31:03)

seth · 2023-11-01 21:01:41

How can an instant failure of a fresh current install not be a bug?

After installing the 2308 version

If you're "installing version anything of anything" you're conducting a partial update and this is most certainly NOT a "fresh current install"

Post the output of

pacman -Qikk libabseil-cpp qgis

then run

pacman -Syu

and check the impact.

Scimmia · 2023-11-02 01:54:16

LorenAmelang wrote:

What does "Partial upgrades are not supported" mean?

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System … nsupported

LorenAmelang · 2023-11-02 19:34:37

A summary reply for all the places this issue was mentioned...

I began by installing the default pacman version of the QGIS package, for the first time on this machine, not an update of it or a specific version.
It immediately failed, saying it couldn't find libabsl_log_internal_check_op.so.2308.0.0.
Certainly seems to me like either QGIS didn't specify that as a dependency, or pacman didn't check it.

Reply:
If you're "installing version anything of anything" you're conducting a partial update and this is most certainly NOT a "fresh current install"

So are we now required to do a full system update whenever we install any single package? Before installing, after installing, or both?

Aha! Looks like that's true:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System … nsupported
That needs much more exposure - and should have been linked in the first reply I received to my bug report!

Reply:
Post the output of pacman -Qikk libabseil-cpp qgis

It shows error: package 'libabseil-cpp' was not found - both before and after the full system update and restart. And still just now.

Looks like it is:
pacman -Qikk abseil-cpp
Name : abseil-cpp
Version : 20230802.1-1
Description : Collection of C++ library code designed to augment the C++ standard library
Install Date : Tue 31 Oct 2023 02:07:39 PM PDT
Install Reason : Installed as a dependency for another package
abseil-cpp: 787 total files, 0 altered files

That Tue 31 Oct 2023 02:07:39 PM PDT date was when I tried installing the absl/abseil packages, long after I inatalled QGIS.
So does 20230802.1-1 imply libabsl_log_internal_check_op.so.2308.0.0 ?

I had tried installing both python-absl-1.4.0-3 and abseil-cpp-20230802.1-1 , both appeared successful.
The libabsl_log_internal_check_op.so version on disk changed.
The QGIS error changed - after I installed what it said it wanted, it complained it couldn't find the previous version. but it still failed.

Reply:
It seems to me this is not an issue related to the QGIS code base, but a packaging issue probably system related.

Seems that depends on whether QGIS specifies that python-absl-1.4.0-3 or abseil-cpp-20230802.1-1 are dependencies.

Pacman only looked for:
Packages (26) assimp-5.2.5-2 blosc-1.21.5-1 draco-1.5.6-2 gdal-3.7.2-3
geos-3.12.0-1 gsl-2.7.1-3 hdf5-1.14.2-1 libaec-1.0.6-1
libfreexl-2.0.0-1 libgeotiff-1.7.1-2 librttopo-1.1.0-5
libspatialite-5.1.0-1 libzip-1.10.1-1 netcdf-4.9.2-2 pdal-2.5.6-1
proj-9.3.0-1 python-qscintilla-qt5-2.14.1-1 qhull-2020.2-4
qscintilla-qt5-2.14.1-1 qt5-3d-5.15.11-1 qt5-location-5.15.11+kde+r5-1
qtkeychain-qt5-0.14.1-2 qwt-6.2.0-1 spatialindex-1.9.3-1
xerces-c-3.2.4-3 qgis-3.34.0-1

Maybe one of those should have included it? Far beyond my knowledge...

At least I've fumbled my way to a working QGIS...

Trilby · 2023-11-02 19:44:46

LorenAmelang wrote:

So are we now required to do a full system update whenever we install any single package?

While many may advise this as good practice, it is certainly not required. What is required is that you never update the sync databases without upgrading all packages.

You most certainly can (attempt to) install a new package without updating your system, and it will either proceed successfully and safely, or pacman will give a 404 error if the version of the package matching your current system databases is no longer available on the mirrors.

As for the "now" in your quoted statement, that seems to imply that this is a new requirement / restriction. It isn't. Arch has "always" worked this way. (Technically the very first versions of arch over 15 years ago were not rolling releases and this may have been different back then).

Last edited by Trilby (2023-11-02 19:49:14)

seth · 2023-11-02 19:51:52

https://bbs.archlinux.org/help.php#bbcode

So are we now required to do a full system update whenever we install any single package?

No, you're just not supposed to do "pacman -Sy foo", "pacman -S foo" is ok.

I had tried installing both python-absl-1.4.0-3 and abseil-cpp-20230802.1-1 , both appeared successful.

Likewise installing specific verions of nything is very most likely resulting in a partial update

We're lacking the -Qikk output for qgis, you can also check

pactree qgis # from pacman-contrib

to see whether and how it depends on abseil-cpp, but it certainly got rebuild for the update: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/ … 4c99370ad2

At least I've fumbled my way to a working QGIS...

"Fumbled" how? What are the current versions of the relevant packages and did you simplsy run "pacman -Syu" in the meantime to get the system into a consistent state?

hcjl · 2023-11-02 19:52:36

Maybe you should have read the forum rules a little bit more intensively.

EDIT: Sorry, there have been some more constructive posts while I was writing.

Last edited by hcjl (2023-11-02 20:08:25)

LorenAmelang · 2023-11-02 21:11:06

Thanks so much - I think I understand this now!

"What is required is that you never update the sync databases without upgrading all packages."

My first attempt to install QGIS got 404 from all the mirrors. "pacman -Syy" seemed to fix that. Guess that was my huge mistake.

But I've gotten away with it for ages - on simple packages. QGIS is not simple!

Wish I'd known to try "pactree qgis":

├─protobuf
│ ├─gcc-libs
│ ├─glibc
│ ├─zlib
│ └─abseil-cpp
│ └─gcc-libs

Much more useful than searching manually!

I appreciate the replies!

seth · 2023-11-02 21:20:12

Please read "man pacman" to see what the second "y" does and then stop using it unless you really mean to.
And yes, at this point you absolutely started a partial update (of qgis) causing all the following issues.

But I've gotten away with it for ages - on simple packages.

No. "On sheer luck" - to reliably perform partial updates, you'll have to exactly know (and I mean "know", not "believe") what you're doing.
If you don't, you simply don't conduct them or you'll inevitably get in trouble at some point (yesterday, it seems)

Please the the bbcode link I posted and use that in future posts and also please always remember to mark resolved threads by editing your initial posts subject - so others will know that there's no task left, but maybe a solution to find.
Thanks.

Trilby · 2023-11-03 01:00:06

What's the "it" that you've gotten away with for ages? If it's just installing a new package without udpating, that is, as noted, fine (i.e., you can `pacman -S newpackage` to your heart's content). You only had a problem this time because you passed pacman the -Sy flags without the -u and then proceeded to `pacman -S newpackage` afterwards. The combination of these two commands is the problem.

Also note that one can, in fact, "get away" with running these two problematic commands so long as it was not too long since the last full upgrade (so that there were no actual changes to the databases, or at least none involving packages installed on the target system). This is just like how people can "get away with" playing Russian Roulette 5 times out of 6 with no harm ... it's still a horrible idea.

Last edited by Trilby (2023-11-03 01:03:54)

Arch Linux

#1 2023-11-01 20:43:54

Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#2 2023-11-01 21:01:41

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#3 2023-11-02 01:54:16

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#4 2023-11-02 19:34:37

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#5 2023-11-02 19:44:46

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#6 2023-11-02 19:51:52

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#7 2023-11-02 19:52:36

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#8 2023-11-02 21:11:06

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#9 2023-11-02 21:20:12

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

#10 2023-11-03 01:00:06

Re: Resolved - Partial upgrades are not supported" libabsl_log_internal_

Board footer