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.
I removed the package years ago from my -current system and it's been working fine. If you detect a missing library you only need to install the corresponding package.
But children don't hear "NOT". If you tell them not to jump into the mud, they will predictably do just that!
Therefore I vote for something like "Keep aaa_elflibs always and forever unchanged! Avoid upgrading it!"
gargamel
Except ofcourse, that still doesn't explain "why", which is the whole point of comments in code: to explain why you did something that's not obvious without the comment.
"Don't upgrade aaa_elflibs" isn't a useful comment as it adds no new information. We can see its blacklisted as it has an entry in the file in the first place.
"Can't upgrade aaa_elflibs" is more useful as it adds the information that aaa_elflibs can't be upgraded, but it's ambiguous. Can't be upgraded automatically? What about manually? Shouldn't be updated at all? Why?
"Upgrading aaa_elflibs may downgrade system libraries and cause problems.", is the key information that should be included in the comment. Exact wording doesn't really matter as long as that information is conveyed to the reader.
--- blacklist.orig 2009-08-15 17:02:05.732282572 -0500
+++ blacklist 2009-08-15 17:02:53.292166938 -0500
@@ -20,7 +20,8 @@
#
# aaa_elflibs can't be updated.
-#
+# "can't" is a contraction meaning "cannot"
+# We don't know how to make it any clearer.
aaa_elflibs
#
What GazL said. That message has always been there, but it never sated any potential curiosity.
Just to learn a little more: What kind of problems did you encounter after upgrading aaa_elflibs?
gargamel
I think it was a slackpkg error, something about gpg, and other errors. It was too long ago for me to remember exactly. I suspect aaa_elflibs was the problem as it went away after I grabebd various libraries from my local mirror and installed them via pkgtool.
What GazL said. That message has always been there, but it never sated any potential curiosity.
Okay, how about this then:
Code:
liberty $ head -n16 aaa_elflibs-12.34-x86_64-2
PACKAGE NAME: aaa_elflibs-12.34-x86_64-2
COMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 3176K
UNCOMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 11040K
PACKAGE LOCATION: /var/log/mount/a/aaa_elflibs-12.34-x86_64-2.txz
PACKAGE DESCRIPTION:
aaa_elflibs: aaa_elflibs (shared libraries needed by many programs)
aaa_elflibs:
aaa_elflibs: This is a collection of shared libraries needed to run Linux programs.
aaa_elflibs: ELF (Executable and Linking Format) is the standard Linux binary
aaa_elflibs: format. These libraries are gathered from other Slackware packages
aaa_elflibs: and are intended to give a fairly complete initial set of libraries.
aaa_elflibs: This package should be not upgraded or reinstalled (it could copy
aaa_elflibs: over newer library versions).
aaa_elflibs:
aaa_elflibs:
aaa_elflibs:
liberty $ head -n16 aaa_elflibs-12.34-x86_64-2
PACKAGE NAME: aaa_elflibs-12.34-x86_64-2
COMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 3176K
UNCOMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 11040K
PACKAGE LOCATION: /var/log/mount/a/aaa_elflibs-12.34-x86_64-2.txz
PACKAGE DESCRIPTION:
aaa_elflibs: aaa_elflibs (shared libraries needed by many programs)
aaa_elflibs:
aaa_elflibs: This is a collection of shared libraries needed to run Linux programs.
aaa_elflibs: ELF (Executable and Linking Format) is the standard Linux binary
aaa_elflibs: format. These libraries are gathered from other Slackware packages
aaa_elflibs: and are intended to give a fairly complete initial set of libraries.
aaa_elflibs: This package should be not upgraded or reinstalled (it could copy
aaa_elflibs: over newer library versions).
aaa_elflibs:
aaa_elflibs:
aaa_elflibs:
Reading the package description should cover it.
Redundancy in slackpkg blocklist file may help slackpkg users find the answer quicker, but fair enough.
But that message doesn't apply in the -current tree. :-)
This is one of those situations in which you are, as evidenced by the fact that you're following -current, expected to understand that the warning doesn't apply here.
Upgrade aaa_elflibs first in this batch of updates, and you'll be fine.
yeah, sorry if I was ambiguos: I meant to throw a little light on why slackpkg doesn't update it automatically and without opening a new thread to say it's safe to update the package *today* with the rest I found this one in which I read your first reply.
I upgraded it just after today's slackpkg's run with upgradepkg
But that message doesn't apply in the -current tree. :-)
This is one of those situations in which you are, as evidenced by the fact that you're following -current, expected to understand that the warning doesn't apply here.
[...]
Yes, thanks, of course, and I generally agree, and usually I stick to -stable releases. Slackware 13.0 is an exception, though, and probably not only for me, because -current eliminates several little snags, mostly in KDE 4.2.4. The KDE version that comes with -current has quite a few improvements.
I guess, that many Slackers, who usually stick to -stable, pick -current these days, because of similar reasons. Some of them, like me (or should I really be the only one?) usually don't mess with -current, and may therefore have not the expertise you assume for users of -current.
But as I said, I generally totally agree with you, but I just think that 13.0 is a special case.
As soon as 13.1 is released I'll stick to -current, again, I think. Because all my issues are solved since KDE 4.3.4.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
