ALHP/ALHP.GO
6
34
Fork 9
Code Issues 30 Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

gzip, xz with "Unknown Packager" #97

New Issue
Closed
opened 2022-02-02 07:23:16 +01:00 by mbod · 8 comments
mbod commented 2022-02-02 07:23:16 +01:00
Copy Link

I installed some compression tools from ALHP. But xz or gzip have wrong resp. incomplete Packager information.

Example:

Name            : xz
Version         : 5.2.5-2.1
Description     : Library and command line tools for XZ and LZMA compressed files
Architecture    : x86_64
URL             : https://tukaani.org/xz/
Licenses        : GPL  LGPL  custom
Groups          : None
Provides        : None
Depends On      : sh
Optional Deps   : None
Required By     : base  bind  botan  dpkg  dracut  ffmpeg  file  fsarchiver  gdb  graphicsmagick  grub  handbrake
                  handbrake-cli  kmod  lib32-xz  libarchive  libelf  libtiff  libunwind  libxml2  libxmlb  mariadb-libs
                  ostree  perf  raptor  squashfs-tools  systemd  systemd-libs  yelp  zstd
Optional For    : mkinitcpio  python  sanoid
Conflicts With  : None
Replaces        : None
Installed Size  : 966,24 KiB
Packager        : Unknown Packager
Build Date      : So 19 Sep 2021 11:24:23 CEST
Install Date    : Mi 02 Feb 2022 07:13:54 CET
Install Reason  : Explicitly installed
Install Script  : No
Validated By    : Signature

Packager should be "ALHP x86-64-v3 <alhp@harting.dev>" or "ALHP Buildbot <alhp@anonfunc.net>".

Example:

Name            : zstd
Version         : 1.5.2-2.1
Description     : Zstandard - Fast real-time compression algorithm
Architecture    : x86_64
URL             : https://facebook.github.io/zstd/
Licenses        : BSD  GPL2
Groups          : None
Provides        : libzstd.so=1-64
Depends On      : glibc  gcc-libs  zlib  xz  lz4
Optional Deps   : None
Required By     : blosc  boost-libs  btrfs-progs  curl  fsarchiver  kmod  lib32-zstd  libarchive  libelf  libtiff  libzip
                  mariadb  mesa  mkinitcpio  mongo-c-driver  perf  plocate  python-pyzstd  qemu  rsync  squashfs-tools
                  systemd-libs  wireshark-cli
Optional For    : sanoid
Conflicts With  : None
Replaces        : None
Installed Size  : 2,74 MiB
Packager        : ALHP x86-64-v3 <alhp@harting.dev>
Build Date      : Sa 29 Jan 2022 18:39:40 CET
Install Date    : Mi 02 Feb 2022 07:01:16 CET
Install Reason  : Installed as a dependency for another package
Install Script  : No
Validated By    : Signature

I use this Packager information to search for packages which I have installed from the ALHP repo.

I installed some compression tools from ALHP. But xz or gzip have wrong resp. incomplete Packager information. Example: ``` Name : xz Version : 5.2.5-2.1 Description : Library and command line tools for XZ and LZMA compressed files Architecture : x86_64 URL : https://tukaani.org/xz/ Licenses : GPL LGPL custom Groups : None Provides : None Depends On : sh Optional Deps : None Required By : base bind botan dpkg dracut ffmpeg file fsarchiver gdb graphicsmagick grub handbrake handbrake-cli kmod lib32-xz libarchive libelf libtiff libunwind libxml2 libxmlb mariadb-libs ostree perf raptor squashfs-tools systemd systemd-libs yelp zstd Optional For : mkinitcpio python sanoid Conflicts With : None Replaces : None Installed Size : 966,24 KiB Packager : Unknown Packager Build Date : So 19 Sep 2021 11:24:23 CEST Install Date : Mi 02 Feb 2022 07:13:54 CET Install Reason : Explicitly installed Install Script : No Validated By : Signature ``` Packager should be "`ALHP x86-64-v3 <alhp@harting.dev>`" or "`ALHP Buildbot <alhp@anonfunc.net>`". Example: ``` Name : zstd Version : 1.5.2-2.1 Description : Zstandard - Fast real-time compression algorithm Architecture : x86_64 URL : https://facebook.github.io/zstd/ Licenses : BSD GPL2 Groups : None Provides : libzstd.so=1-64 Depends On : glibc gcc-libs zlib xz lz4 Optional Deps : None Required By : blosc boost-libs btrfs-progs curl fsarchiver kmod lib32-zstd libarchive libelf libtiff libzip mariadb mesa mkinitcpio mongo-c-driver perf plocate python-pyzstd qemu rsync squashfs-tools systemd-libs wireshark-cli Optional For : sanoid Conflicts With : None Replaces : None Installed Size : 2,74 MiB Packager : ALHP x86-64-v3 <alhp@harting.dev> Build Date : Sa 29 Jan 2022 18:39:40 CET Install Date : Mi 02 Feb 2022 07:01:16 CET Install Reason : Installed as a dependency for another package Install Script : No Validated By : Signature ``` I use this Packager information to search for packages which I have installed from the ALHP repo.
anonfunc commented 2022-02-02 11:33:00 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Setting the packager information was implemented just a few months ago, so relying on that to find alhp packages is not ideal.

If you want packages installed from a specific repository, you can do that for example with

pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]"

or

comm -12 <(pacman -Qq | sort) <(pacman -Sql core-x86-64-v3 | sort)
Setting the packager information was implemented just a few months ago, so relying on that to find alhp packages is not ideal. If you want packages installed from a specific repository, you can do that for example with ``` pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]" ``` or ``` comm -12 <(pacman -Qq | sort) <(pacman -Sql core-x86-64-v3 | sort) ```
anonfunc added the
question
 label 2022-02-02 11:33:06 +01:00
mbod commented 2022-02-02 13:47:12 +01:00
Author
Copy Link
pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]"

This does not work 100 %. In my case it gives:

# pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]"                  
core-x86-64-v3 bzip2 1.0.8-4.1 [installed]
core-x86-64-v3 gzip 1.11-1.1 [installed]
core-x86-64-v3 lz4 1:1.9.3-2.1 [installed]
core-x86-64-v3 lzo 2.10-3.1 [installed]
core-x86-64-v3 xz 5.2.5-2.1 [installed]
core-x86-64-v3 zlib 1:1.2.11-5.1 [installed]
core-x86-64-v3 zstd 1.5.2-2.1 [installed]

But this is missing linux-lts, darktable, gimp and others which I have also installed from ALHP:

Name            : linux-lts
Version         : 5.15.18-1.1
Description     : The LTS Linux kernel and modules
Architecture    : x86_64
URL             : https://www.kernel.org/
Licenses        : GPL2
Groups          : None
Provides        : VIRTUALBOX-GUEST-MODULES  WIREGUARD-MODULE
Depends On      : coreutils  kmod  initramfs
Optional Deps   : crda: to set the correct wireless channels of your country [installed]
                  linux-firmware: firmware images needed for some devices [installed]
Required By     : None
Optional For    : None
Conflicts With  : None
Replaces        : wireguard-lts
Installed Size  : 134,94 MiB
Packager        : ALHP x86-64-v3 <alhp@harting.dev>
Build Date      : So 30 Jan 2022 11:35:12 CET
Install Date    : Di 01 Feb 2022 13:17:35 CET
Install Reason  : Explicitly installed
Install Script  : No
Validated By    : Signature

And this command

comm -12 <(pacman -Qq | sort) <(pacman -Sql core-x86-64-v3 | sort)

does not work at all. It gives me a huge list of 174 packages which I certainly have not installed from ALHP.

``` pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]" ``` This does not work 100 %. In my case it gives: ``` # pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]" core-x86-64-v3 bzip2 1.0.8-4.1 [installed] core-x86-64-v3 gzip 1.11-1.1 [installed] core-x86-64-v3 lz4 1:1.9.3-2.1 [installed] core-x86-64-v3 lzo 2.10-3.1 [installed] core-x86-64-v3 xz 5.2.5-2.1 [installed] core-x86-64-v3 zlib 1:1.2.11-5.1 [installed] core-x86-64-v3 zstd 1.5.2-2.1 [installed] ``` But this is missing linux-lts, darktable, gimp and others which I have also installed from ALHP: ``` Name : linux-lts Version : 5.15.18-1.1 Description : The LTS Linux kernel and modules Architecture : x86_64 URL : https://www.kernel.org/ Licenses : GPL2 Groups : None Provides : VIRTUALBOX-GUEST-MODULES WIREGUARD-MODULE Depends On : coreutils kmod initramfs Optional Deps : crda: to set the correct wireless channels of your country [installed] linux-firmware: firmware images needed for some devices [installed] Required By : None Optional For : None Conflicts With : None Replaces : wireguard-lts Installed Size : 134,94 MiB Packager : ALHP x86-64-v3 <alhp@harting.dev> Build Date : So 30 Jan 2022 11:35:12 CET Install Date : Di 01 Feb 2022 13:17:35 CET Install Reason : Explicitly installed Install Script : No Validated By : Signature ``` And this command ``` comm -12 <(pacman -Qq | sort) <(pacman -Sql core-x86-64-v3 | sort) ``` does not work at all. It gives me a huge list of 174 packages which I certainly have not installed from ALHP.
anonfunc commented 2022-02-02 14:08:49 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link
pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]"

This does not work 100 %. In my case it gives:

Have you syned your databases in the meantime? Because your linux-lts is not up to date, if you synced your local databases in the meantime, it will probalby not show installed there. Just a guess.

EDIT: Just checked, linux-lts shows up for me, so that is probably something on your side.

> ``` > pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]" > ``` > > This does not work 100 %. In my case it gives: > Have you syned your databases in the meantime? Because your `linux-lts` is not up to date, if you synced your local databases in the meantime, it will probalby not show installed there. Just a guess. *EDIT*: Just checked, `linux-lts` shows up for me, so that is probably something on your side.
mbod commented 2022-02-02 14:32:25 +01:00
Author
Copy Link

Even if my linux-lts is one version behind, i should be able to report it as an installed ALHP package. But you are right: updating linux-lts makes it visible with your command.

But what does that tell me? I can not pull a report showing all installed ALHP packages when some packages are not up to date?

For the other packages I have mentioned (gimp, darktable, etc.) I believe the issue is that they are not from core-x86-64-v3 but from community-x86-64-v3. It looks like I would need to run your command three times for core-x86-64-v3, extra-x86-64-v3 and community-x86-64-v3. Hmmm...

Even if my linux-lts is one version behind, i should be able to report it as an installed ALHP package. But you are right: updating linux-lts makes it visible with your command. But what does that tell me? I can not pull a report showing all installed ALHP packages when some packages are not up to date? For the other packages I have mentioned (gimp, darktable, etc.) I believe the issue is that they are not from `core-x86-64-v3` but from `community-x86-64-v3`. It looks like I would need to run your command three times for core-x86-64-v3, extra-x86-64-v3 and community-x86-64-v3. Hmmm...
anonfunc commented 2022-02-02 14:48:43 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

But what does that tell me? I can not pull a report showing all installed ALHP packages when some packages are not up to date?

No, that means partial upgrades are not supported. But that is nothing new, right? Either sync databases and upgrade or do not sync databases.

For the other packages I have mentioned (gimp, darktable, etc.) I believe the issue is that they are not from core-x86-64-v3 but from community-x86-64-v3. It looks like I would need to run your command three times for core-x86-64-v3, extra-x86-64-v3 and community-x86-64-v3. Hmmm...

You can specify multiple repos at once.

pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 extra-x86-64-v3 community-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]"
> But what does that tell me? I can not pull a report showing all installed ALHP packages when some packages are not up to date? No, that means partial upgrades are not supported. But that is nothing new, right? Either sync databases and upgrade or do not sync databases. > For the other packages I have mentioned (gimp, darktable, etc.) I believe the issue is that they are not from core-x86-64-v3 but from community-x86-64-v3. It looks like I would need to run your command three times for core-x86-64-v3, extra-x86-64-v3 and community-x86-64-v3. Hmmm... You can specify multiple repos at once. ```sh pacman -Sl core-x86-64-v3 extra-x86-64-v3 community-x86-64-v3 | grep "\[installed\]" ```
mbod commented 2022-02-02 14:56:51 +01:00
Author
Copy Link

What is not supported?

The database was synced, but I decided to not update linux-lts. I kept it on 5.15.18 while the database was having 5.15.19. That is not supported? Have you ever heard about the IgnorePkg option?

Anyways, I understand that there is no easy way to pull a report that shows all packages installed from ALHP. And with all I mean: Regardless of package version and regardless of which AHLP repo it is from.

What is not supported? The database was synced, but I decided to not update linux-lts. I kept it on 5.15.18 while the database was having 5.15.19. That is not supported? Have you ever heard about the IgnorePkg option? Anyways, I understand that there is no easy way to pull a report that shows **all** packages installed from ALHP. And with **all** I mean: Regardless of package version and regardless of which AHLP repo it is from.
👀 1
anonfunc commented 2022-02-02 15:02:32 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

What is not supported?

The database was synced, but I decided to not update linux-lts. I kept it on 5.15.18 while the database was having 5.15.19. That is not supported? Have you ever heard about the IgnorePkg option?

As soon as you sync databases and not decide to upgrade you are in partial upgrade territory. And that is not supported by neither Archlinux nor ALHP.
There was a rather lengthy discussion about that on some Archlinux mailing list just recently, you are free to look that up. Wiki also mentions this on multiple occasions.

And this has nothing to do with IgnorePkg.

Have you ever heard about the IgnorePkg option?

No, please tell me more, I never used pacman before. :P

> What is not supported? > > The database was synced, but I decided to not update linux-lts. I kept it on 5.15.18 while the database was having 5.15.19. That is not supported? Have you ever heard about the IgnorePkg option? As soon as you sync databases and not decide to upgrade you are in partial upgrade territory. And that is not supported by neither Archlinux nor ALHP. There was a rather lengthy discussion about that on some Archlinux mailing list just recently, you are free to look that up. Wiki also mentions this on multiple occasions. And this has nothing to do with `IgnorePkg`. > Have you ever heard about the IgnorePkg option? No, please tell me more, I never used pacman before. :P
mbod commented 2022-02-02 17:09:19 +01:00
Author
Copy Link

THis is now going off topic. But before I close this issue let me share the wiki link that you mentioned:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported

I fully understand what this article is saying but I also fully understand that pacman supports partial upgrades with the IgnorePkg option. And that it is a must-have function for any rolling release distro to block updates if a new package version breaks a system. That is also the reason why several distros provide a downgrade application. Partial updates are common. E.g. to keep the kernel on a certain level or to stick to xorg-server 1.20.13 because anything newer introduces artefacts, etc. pp.

Anyways, I will close it here.

THis is now going off topic. But before I close this issue let me share the wiki link that you mentioned: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported I fully understand what this article is saying but I also fully understand that pacman supports partial upgrades with the IgnorePkg option. And that it is a must-have function for any rolling release distro to block updates if a new package version breaks a system. That is also the reason why several distros provide a `downgrade` application. Partial updates are common. E.g. to keep the kernel on a certain level or to stick to xorg-server 1.20.13 because anything newer introduces artefacts, etc. pp. Anyways, I will close it here.
mbod closed this issue 2022-02-02 17:09:19 +01:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels   
blocked upstream

   
bug

Something is not working

  
build-failure

package build fails because of our added buildflags

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature

  
help wanted

Need some help

  
informational

Provides information about something

  
invalid

Something is wrong

  
invalid/corrupt package

Package needs to be rebuild

  
packaging issue

   
priority: high

High priority

  
question

More information is needed

  
support

   
wontfix

This won't be fixed

No Label
blocked upstream
bug
build-failure
duplicate
enhancement
help wanted
informational
invalid
invalid/corrupt package
packaging issue
priority: high
question
support
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: ALHP/ALHP.GO#97
No description provided.
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?