[SOLVED] slackpkg slackware64 packages masked but in changelog.txt
SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
slackpkg slackware64 packages masked but in changelog.txt
'slackpkg upgrade-all' shows packages that are available for upgrade, such as glibc, but are not installed. glibc appears in the base install repository file tree.
When 'slackpkg search glibc' is run the following is returned:
I cannot remember why or how they were masked.
I seem to remember ferreting this out before, but can't find the reason.
Should the following packages be installed?:
Thu Apr 1 23:50:48 UTC 2021
a/aaa_glibc-solibs-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
ap/inxi-20210329_a539c8fd-noarch-1.txz: Upgraded.
l/glibc-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
l/glibc-i18n-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
l/glibc-profile-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
If they are, I am also trying to understand how they got masked.
The short answer is; install those updates. I updated four system this morning, and all is well.
Yes, they were installed before. Pat has rebuilt those packages for a good reason. If you look at the package naming, the last number before the .txz is bumped up by one form the previous install of the package. It probably is because of linking with another library that got updated.
'slackpkg upgrade-all' shows packages that are available for upgrade, such as glibc, but are not installed. glibc appears in the base install repository file tree.
When 'slackpkg search glibc' is run the following is returned:
I cannot remember why or how they were masked.
I seem to remember ferreting this out before, but can't find the reason.
Should the following packages be installed?:
Thu Apr 1 23:50:48 UTC 2021
a/aaa_glibc-solibs-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
ap/inxi-20210329_a539c8fd-noarch-1.txz: Upgraded.
l/glibc-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
l/glibc-i18n-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
l/glibc-profile-2.33-x86_64-2.txz: Rebuilt.
If they are, I am also trying to understand how they got masked.
They are masked because you have multilib in your slackpkgplus.conf. You did not post your slackpkgplus.conf file but I bet there is a entry for multilib for PKGS_PRIOROTY. This is my slackpkgplus.conf (applicable entries)
Code:
PKGS_PRIORITY=( slackware64:id3lib ) # 2018-01-09, also in alienbob
PKGS_PRIORITY+=( slackware64:gcc ) # 2020-09-17, give slackware packages priority over multilib.
PKGS_PRIORITY+=( justpkgs )
PKGS_PRIORITY+=( nonslack )
#PKGS_PRIORITY+=( slackpkgbeta ) # We now have a slackpkg-15.
PKGS_PRIORITY+=( slackpkgplus multilib restricted alienbob )
REPOPLUS=( justpkgs )
REPOPLUS+=( nonslack )
REPOPLUS+=( slackpkgbeta )
REPOPLUS+=( slackpkgplus multilib restricted alienbob )
MIRRORPLUS['slackpkgplus']=http://slakfinder.org/slackpkg+dev/
MIRRORPLUS['nonslack']=file://home/non-slack/slackbuilds/
MIRRORPLUS['justpkgs']=dir://home/non-slack/justpkgs/
MIRRORPLUS['multilib']=file://home/non-slack/multilib/current/
MIRRORPLUS['alienbob']=file://home/non-slack/alienbob/current/x86_64/
MIRRORPLUS['restricted']=file://home/non-slack/alienbob_restricted/current/x86_64/
MIRRORPLUS['slackpkgbeta']=httpsdir://slackpkg.org/beta/
Results of search:
Code:
slackpkg search glibc
Looking for glibc in package list. Please wait... DONE
The list below shows all packages with name matching "glibc".
[ Status ] [ Repository ] [ Package ]
installed multilib aaa_glibc-solibs-2.33_multilib-x86_64-1alien
installed multilib glibc-2.33_multilib-x86_64-1alien
installed multilib glibc-i18n-2.33_multilib-x86_64-1alien
installed multilib glibc-profile-2.33_multilib-x86_64-1alien
installed slackware64 glibc-zoneinfo-2021a-noarch-1
uninstalled(masked) slackware64 aaa_glibc-solibs-2.33-x86_64-2
uninstalled(masked) slackware64 glibc-2.33-x86_64-2
uninstalled(masked) slackware64 glibc-i18n-2.33-x86_64-2
uninstalled(masked) slackware64 glibc-profile-2.33-x86_64-2
Last edited by chrisretusn; 04-02-2021 at 08:10 PM.
They shouldn't be installed, if they are masked then that means that you are using the multilib packages instead. Alien Bob will update his repository with new packages built for multilib.
Last edited by RadicalDreamer; 04-02-2021 at 08:24 PM.
The short answer is; install those updates. I updated four system this morning, and all is well.
Yes, they were installed before. Pat has rebuilt those packages for a good reason. If you look at the package naming, the last number before the .txz is bumped up by one form the previous install of the package. It probably is because of linking with another library that got updated.
Since it appears that multilib is installed, presumably for a reason. Installing those masked packages could bork multilib. They should not be installed. Those packages are the multilib replacements provided by Alien Bob. The new builds will eventually appear in the multilib repository along with probably a refresh of compat32 packages.
That said since its a rebuild it might still work, as it does for you assuming you have multilib installed (you did not say). Than again it might not.
Last edited by chrisretusn; 04-02-2021 at 08:30 PM.
Apologies to all for the brainfart. As I get older, fatter and more feeble minded I'll likely post similar newbie posers. It is correct that multilib will support 32 and 64 bit code.
To avoid conflicts, glibc stuff is masked.
To wit, "A multilib 64bit Linux system is capable of running 64bit as well as 32bit software."
ref: https://docs.slackware.com/slackware:multilib
I should get out more...
There was a time when anyone asking a question like this would pull back a bloody stub. I hope it's an indication that civility has returned to the web.
Thanks to all for your gentle remider and patience.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
