Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 448470 - sys-process/audit-2.2.2 incorrectly suggests removal of /lib/
Summary: sys-process/audit-2.2.2 incorrectly suggests removal of /lib/
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Core system (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal critical with 1 vote (vote)
Assignee: Robin Johnson
Depends on:
Reported: 2012-12-24 23:03 UTC by Simon C. Ion
Modified: 2016-05-21 13:32 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

emerge --info (file_448470.txt,5.23 KB, text/plain)
2012-12-24 23:03 UTC, Simon C. Ion
audit-2.2.2-r2.ebuild excluding libauparse from preserve_old_lib* (audit-fix-ebuild.patch,541 bytes, patch)
2014-07-09 19:03 UTC, Sven Vermeulen (RETIRED)
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Simon C. Ion 2012-12-24 23:03:32 UTC
Created attachment 333232 [details]
emerge --info

After building sys-process/audit-2.2.2, it suggests the following:

 * Old versions of installed libraries were detected on your system.
 * In order to avoid breaking packages that depend on these old libs,
 * the libraries are not being removed.  You need to run revdep-rebuild
 * in order to remove these old dependencies.  If you do not have this
 * helper program, simply emerge the 'gentoolkit' package.
 *   # revdep-rebuild --library '/lib/' && rm '/lib/'

However, the /lib/ symlink is *provided* by sys-process/audit-2.2.2

# equery f =sys-process/audit-2.2.2 | grep "^/lib"

Removing the symlink breaks audit's executables.
Did someone get a little excited when they were authoring this ebuild, or was* supposed to be bumped to* ?
Comment 1 Coacher 2013-01-09 17:34:29 UTC
This is also the issue on amd64 with _STABLE_ sys-process/audit-2.1.3-r1.
Comment 2 Ulenrich 2013-01-10 20:44:05 UTC
confirming for audit-2.2.2 on amd64

The bug is much worse:
It is not an audit.ebuild bug BUT a portage one:

The is a link
/lib64/ points to real /lib64/

But this is not renewed with the new version! This actual gets to the situation
that the portage system thinks it holds the new audit-2.2.2 version 
but the old version is living on!

I guess this has to do with portages new feature!

Please reasign this from audit to a portage issue !!!
Comment 3 Ulenrich 2013-01-10 21:17:00 UTC
My portage had been kept to stable too long:

This bug seems the same as
which is solved with newest sys-apps/portage-

I will try ...
Comment 4 Ulenrich 2013-01-10 22:13:13 UTC
No, the new portage- doesn't work either
Comment 5 Maciej S. Szmigiero 2013-02-03 19:08:25 UTC
I confirm this, this is a bug in sys-process/audit-2.* ebuilds.

They contains these two lines:
# Preserve from the audit-1 series
preserve_old_lib /$(get_libdir)/libau{dit,parse}.so.0

Although major version was incremented by upstream
when going from audit-1.* to audit-2.* no such change was done to

So the preservation is unnecessary here (unless these two versions
aren't binary compatible, but then the major version of this
library would have to be changed).
Comment 6 Jory A. Pratt gentoo-dev 2013-03-14 03:26:01 UTC
revdep-rebuild --library '/lib/' && rm '/lib/'  will lead to breakage until next revdep-rebuild is run which will force the rebuild hense esculation in importants.
Comment 7 Coacher 2013-11-20 12:59:26 UTC
Comment 8 Pacho Ramos gentoo-dev 2014-05-02 11:19:39 UTC
Why don't drop all that magic now that we have preserved-rebuild enabled in current portage?
Comment 9 Sven Vermeulen (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2014-07-09 19:03:23 UTC
Created attachment 380506 [details, diff]
audit-2.2.2-r2.ebuild excluding libauparse from preserve_old_lib*

This patch excludes libauparse from that preserve_old_libs* call.

If that is all that is needed for stabilization of audit-2.2.2?
Comment 10 Andreas Wiese 2015-03-26 12:35:25 UTC
This issue is still present in the ebuild for version 2.4.1.  The issue is still exactly the same, thus applying a patch like the one provided in comment #9 would still fix it.  Anyone out there willing to fix this?  Could _please_ somebody out there fix this?
Comment 11 Robin Johnson archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2015-05-16 05:56:09 UTC