Pacman doesn't work properly

professor · 2007-11-30 20:50:22

Hi,

Wen I try upgrade my systeme with pacman, he sais me:
no update found.

Okay fine, but my system isn't updated from many time already. If I try to install a package, pacman downlad packages and I recieve answere like

alsa-lib: /usr/include/alsa/seqmid.h exists in filesystem
alsa-lib: /usr/include/alsa/sound/ainstr_fm.h exists in filesystem
alsa-lib: /usr/include/alsa/sound/ainstr_gf1.h exists in filesystem
alsa-lib: /usr/include/alsa/sound/ainstr_iw.h exists in filesystem
alsa-lib: /usr/include/alsa/sound/ainstr_simple.h exists in filesystem
alsa-lib: /usr/include/alsa/sound/asound_fm.h exists in filesystem

For any files in any packages...

Yaourt too dosen't work.

I searched some answers but I did not find anything about that...

Do you know how to resolve this problem?

cactus · 2007-11-30 20:59:21

See what pacman thinks is installed.
pacman -Q

Maybe you accidentally nuked the pacman local database, so it doesn't think anything is installed (thus no updates are needed, and you get lots of conflicts on install attempts).

professor · 2007-11-30 21:19:33

That it, pacman -Q give no answers.

lilsirecho · 2007-11-30 21:36:50

Perhaps not.... Try ....pacman -Q |less

This should list the installed packages and up-down keys permit reads.

professor · 2007-11-30 21:39:12

This file (because I presume its 'a a file) is empty.

Last edited by professor (2007-11-30 21:39:45)

lilsirecho · 2007-11-30 21:39:22

Perhaps a reinstall of pacman will solve your problem.

If you desire, try a re-install of a package already installed to check pacman's performance.

professor · 2007-11-30 21:42:54

I can't reinstall anythings because when he will install package, the files who he want install already exist.

lilsirecho · 2007-11-30 21:44:52

All packages downloaded from pacman are in /var/cache/pacman/pkg. Is that file also empty?

professor · 2007-11-30 21:47:59

Nope, in this place are the downloaded packages.

Actually, he download packages, check dependencies/errors and at th time to place/replace files by a newest version, he said:
pacman: /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/pacman.mo exists in filesystem
for example.

Last edited by professor (2007-11-30 21:50:34)

lilsirecho · 2007-11-30 21:52:31

I suggest that you try.....pacman -U /var/cache/pacman/pkg/*.pkg.tar.gz to re-install.

If it gives errors, then ...pacman -Uf /var/cache/pacman/pkg/*.pkg.tar.gz.

This should re-install all the packages from your local cache and rebuild ...pacman -Q.

Please let us know the result...

professor · 2007-11-30 22:06:37

Okay, so the both command are returned that:

[root@macbook cyril]# pacman -U /var/cache/pacman/pkg/*.pkg.tar.gz
loading package data... done.
checking dependencies... done.
cleaning up... done.
checking 100% done

and after that:

wget: /usr/share/locale/ja/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/nl/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/no/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/pt_BR/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/ro/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/ru/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/sk/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/sl/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/sr/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/tr/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/uk/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/vi/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
wget: /usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/wget.mo exists in filesystem
errors occurred, no packages were upgraded.
[root@blabla ~]

Just, the errors messages is for any files who pacman try to replace by the packages file's (so for every packages I have that).

I really think the pacman's database is broken. Exist a possibility to restor it?

Last edited by professor (2007-11-30 22:06:57)

shining · 2007-11-30 22:12:54

professor wrote:

That it, pacman -Q give no answers.

What did you do? Did you remove /var/lib/pacman/local ? What do you have there?
Did you do touch to anything related to pacman local db? For example a loopback fs or something?
Or is your filesystem corrupted maybe? (you can use fsck for checking)

It's usually a good idea to find out why something breaks in the first place, before even thinking about how to fix it.

professor · 2007-11-30 22:21:14

Yeah, I agree, I already did that (I mean, search why it's dosen't work). The folder /var/lib/pacman/local is empty. I don't remember to do anything in this place or who can attempted to pacman stability. In few words, I don't do ant bad action in ant user. I don't think other person who use my computer did something... But I'm not sure about this last assertion.

lilsirecho · 2007-11-30 23:06:12

You may have to use ...pacman -Sy pacman... to restore a stable pacman system.

Then i think pacman -Syu would follow in order to restore the pacman files.

Others may have better advice........

cucullus · 2007-11-30 23:32:11

You pacman db is wiped.
First of all: pacman -Sy pacman libdownload libarchive
And then total reinstall for preserving right deps linkage.

Jessehk · 2007-11-30 23:36:02

Maybe

pacman -Sf pacman

?

Just a wild guess.

professor · 2007-11-30 23:58:57

YES! the argument -Sf worked! But, of course, that doesn't recovered my database. So I don't know what is updated or not. But in some times I think I will have 100% normal system.

A Big thanks to anyone !!

professor · 2007-12-01 11:33:43

So, sometimes after:

My system is fully broken, for example, no groups exist, no programm can run. I think the most simple solution is to reinstall the system. To make a new clean system...

Last edited by professor (2007-12-01 11:34:25)

djclue917 · 2007-12-01 12:18:14

Nasty and risky solution:

# pacman -Sc
# pacman -Udf /var/cache/pacman/pkg/*.pkg.tar.gz

Then just check the packages installed and remove what you don't want installed. A better solution would be to just view your /var/log/pacman.log and extract the latest list of packages installed on your system.

Or.. just use my quickie script to get your current pkglist based on your pacman.log (save as paclist.py):

#!/usr/bin/env python

log_file = '/var/log/pacman.log'


def main():
    global log_file
    pkglist = []
    log = file(log_file, 'r')

    for line in log:
        try:
            status, pkgname = line.split()[2:4]
        except ValueError:
            continue

        if status == "installed":
            pkglist.append(pkgname)
        elif status == "removed":
            try:
                pkglist.remove(pkgname)
            except ValueError:
                pass

    log.close()
    pkglist.sort()
    print "\n".join(pkglist)


if __name__ == "__main__":
    main()

Usage:

$ ./paclist.py > pkglist
# pacman -Sdf `cat pkglist` --noconfirm

Last edited by djclue917 (2007-12-08 02:19:47)

shining · 2007-12-01 12:26:26

djclue917 wrote:

Nasty and risky solution:
# pacman -Sc
# pacman -Udf /var/cache/pacman/pkg/*.pkg.tar.gz
Then just check the packages installed and remove what you don't want installed. A better solution would be to just view your /var/log/pacman.log and extract the latest list of packages installed on your system.

Indeed, that's nasty and risky. There can be different interpretation of what -Sc does.
It has changed in pacman 3.1 . It looks at the packages locally installed (equivalent of pacman -Q), and removes everything else from the cache.
Since in the current case, the local db is empty, it would remove everything.

Or.. just use this:
grep -E 'upgraded|installed' /var/log/pacman.log | cut -d ' ' -f 4 > pkglist
and remove the duplicates in pkglist.

So yes, I rather recommend this solution.
The log is not localized anymore in 3.1 , so the above will always be possible, even when using a different locale.

professor · 2007-12-01 14:21:57

That maybe useful, but I cannot run programs on system. When I start it, he try to start xdm, he display a message like the group xdm don't exist, create it. And after I am in a shell logged as root@(none) . Before that, my machine's name was blabla. And no other users exist.

Last edited by professor (2007-12-01 14:22:50)

byte · 2007-12-01 15:39:56

shining wrote:

Indeed, that's nasty and risky. There can be different interpretation of what -Sc does.
It has changed in pacman 3.1 . It looks at the packages locally installed (equivalent of pacman -Q), and removes everything else from the cache.
Since in the current case, the local db is empty, it would remove everything.
.
.
.
The log is not localized anymore in 3.1 , so the above will always be possible, even when using a different locale.

Oh, nice. I'll assume that _before_ 3.1 will find its way into the repos, there will be news on the frontpage which lists every detail about the changes, it will stay in testing for at least two weeks, and there'll be BIG, FAT .install messages as well.

Last edited by byte (2007-12-01 15:42:36)

shining · 2007-12-01 16:16:59

byte wrote:

shining wrote:
Indeed, that's nasty and risky. There can be different interpretation of what -Sc does.
It has changed in pacman 3.1 . It looks at the packages locally installed (equivalent of pacman -Q), and removes everything else from the cache.
Since in the current case, the local db is empty, it would remove everything.
.
.
.
The log is not localized anymore in 3.1 , so the above will always be possible, even when using a different locale.
Oh, nice. I'll assume that _before_ 3.1 will find its way into the repos, there will be news on the frontpage which lists every detail about the changes, it will stay in testing for at least two weeks, and there'll be BIG, FAT .install messages as well.

You won't break your system, even if you are not aware of these changes.
So I don't know if it needs to be that excessive, but there should at least be a changelog, as always, mentioning these changes on archlinux.org/pacman , and probably a news announcement linking to it, when it's released.

PS: the above is only speculation, but it can be discussed with Aaron or Dan if needed. The pacman-dev ML is probably a better place for that.

Last edited by shining (2007-12-01 16:18:44)

toofishes · 2007-12-03 02:52:47

shining wrote:

byte wrote:
Oh, nice. I'll assume that _before_ 3.1 will find its way into the repos, there will be news on the frontpage which lists every detail about the changes, it will stay in testing for at least two weeks, and there'll be BIG, FAT .install messages as well.
You won't break your system, even if you are not aware of these changes.
So I don't know if it needs to be that excessive, but there should at least be a changelog, as always, mentioning these changes on archlinux.org/pacman , and probably a news announcement linking to it, when it's released.
PS: the above is only speculation, but it can be discussed with Aaron or Dan if needed. The pacman-dev ML is probably a better place for that.

You speculate well. I would say what he mentioned is about what we will do, and I'm not sure what sitting in testing for two weeks will do as we already have quite a few people testing right now.

Arch Linux

#1 2007-11-30 20:50:22

Pacman doesn't work properly

#2 2007-11-30 20:59:21

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#3 2007-11-30 21:19:33

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#4 2007-11-30 21:36:50

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#5 2007-11-30 21:39:12

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#6 2007-11-30 21:39:22

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#7 2007-11-30 21:42:54

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#8 2007-11-30 21:44:52

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#9 2007-11-30 21:47:59

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#10 2007-11-30 21:52:31

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#11 2007-11-30 22:06:37

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#12 2007-11-30 22:12:54

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#13 2007-11-30 22:21:14

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#14 2007-11-30 23:06:12

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#15 2007-11-30 23:32:11

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#16 2007-11-30 23:36:02

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#17 2007-11-30 23:58:57

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#18 2007-12-01 11:33:43

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#19 2007-12-01 12:18:14

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#20 2007-12-01 12:26:26

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#21 2007-12-01 14:21:57

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#22 2007-12-01 15:39:56

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#23 2007-12-01 16:16:59

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

#24 2007-12-03 02:52:47

Re: Pacman doesn't work properly

Board footer