Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Gentoo: User

Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around?

 

 

Gentoo user RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


stroller at stellar

Jul 16, 2011, 9:53 AM

Post #1 of 20 (1146 views)
Permalink
Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around?

A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around, by any chance?

I have a box which hasn't been updated in 2 - 3 years. It would normally be easiest to format and reinstall, but in this case the box in question is a PS3 which was installed using the experimental PS3 stages which are (I think) no longer available.

I'm pretty sure this machine has some PS3-specific hacks applied, so I think an attempt to upgrade the hard way is worthwhile. If it doesn't work I'll probably try Debian, or something.

I have no illusions that attempting this *will* be a pain the ass, because in the past I've updated machines which have been ignored for 18 months, and that required lots of manually digging in the Portage CVS attic and copying files into the local overlay by hand.

So if anyone has any Portage snapshots that are sufficiently old left lying around from an old install, it would save me that grunt work.

Alternatively, if you, too, have a machine that hasn't been updated a long time, maybe you'll be able to help me by tarring up a copy of the Portage tree.

Thanks for looking,

Stroller.


michael at orlitzky

Jul 16, 2011, 11:11 AM

Post #2 of 20 (1127 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 07/16/2011 12:53 PM, Stroller wrote:
>
> I have no illusions that attempting this *will* be a pain the ass,
> because in the past I've updated machines which have been ignored for
> 18 months, and that required lots of manually digging in the Portage
> CVS attic and copying files into the local overlay by hand.
>

Couldn't you just extract a stage3/snapshot in the root, and then emerge
-e world? I haven't tried it naturally, but it sounds like a good idea
to me at this moment.


acm at muc

Jul 16, 2011, 11:37 AM

Post #3 of 20 (1129 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

Hi, Stroller.

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 05:53:48PM +0100, Stroller wrote:
> A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage
> snapshots kicking around, by any chance?

I have a /usr/portage from 2009-12-20 on my "rescue" system. I don't
think I've synched it after that (but I'm too lazy to look up the `find'
info page to check properly).

Is that any good?

> I have a box which hasn't been updated in 2 - 3 years. It would
> normally be easiest to format and reinstall, but in this case the box
> in question is a PS3 which was installed using the experimental PS3
> stages which are (I think) no longer available.

> I'm pretty sure this machine has some PS3-specific hacks applied, so I
> think an attempt to upgrade the hard way is worthwhile. If it doesn't
> work I'll probably try Debian, or something.

> I have no illusions that attempting this *will* be a pain the ass,
> because in the past I've updated machines which have been ignored for
> 18 months, and that required lots of manually digging in the Portage
> CVS attic and copying files into the local overlay by hand.

> So if anyone has any Portage snapshots that are sufficiently old left
> lying around from an old install, it would save me that grunt work.

> Alternatively, if you, too, have a machine that hasn't been updated a
> long time, maybe you'll be able to help me by tarring up a copy of the
> Portage tree.

As a matter of interest, how, exactly, are you going to use the old
portage? Is it a matter of updating in two moderate chunks rather than
everything at once?

> Thanks for looking,

> Stroller.

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).


markknecht at gmail

Jul 16, 2011, 12:14 PM

Post #4 of 20 (1129 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Stroller
<stroller [at] stellar> wrote:
> A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around, by any chance?
>

Amazingly enough, I have portage.latest.tar.bz2 dated March 30th,
2010. Would that help?

- Mark


cloos at jhcloos

Jul 16, 2011, 1:57 PM

Post #5 of 20 (1121 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

I have a clone of the git conversion whose last commit is dated
Sun Apr 12 21:54:28 2009 +0000, if that is of any help.

-JimC
--
James Cloos <cloos [at] jhcloos> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6


volkerarmin at googlemail

Jul 16, 2011, 2:00 PM

Post #6 of 20 (1124 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On Saturday 16 July 2011 17:53:48 Stroller wrote:
> A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage snapshots
> kicking around, by any chance?
>
> I have a box which hasn't been updated in 2 - 3 years. It would normally be
> easiest to format and reinstall, but in this case the box in question is a
> PS3 which was installed using the experimental PS3 stages which are (I
> think) no longer available.
>
> I'm pretty sure this machine has some PS3-specific hacks applied, so I think
> an attempt to upgrade the hard way is worthwhile. If it doesn't work I'll
> probably try Debian, or something.
>
> I have no illusions that attempting this *will* be a pain the ass, because
> in the past I've updated machines which have been ignored for 18 months,
> and that required lots of manually digging in the Portage CVS attic and
> copying files into the local overlay by hand.
>
> So if anyone has any Portage snapshots that are sufficiently old left lying
> around from an old install, it would save me that grunt work.
>
> Alternatively, if you, too, have a machine that hasn't been updated a long
> time, maybe you'll be able to help me by tarring up a copy of the Portage
> tree.
>
> Thanks for looking,
>
> Stroller.

deinstall everything you don't need to install the rest. Then update that base
system. Afterwards install all the stuff you need.

The less packages installed, the easier the update.

--
#163933


neil at digimed

Jul 16, 2011, 2:34 PM

Post #7 of 20 (1125 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 18:37:44 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

> I have a /usr/portage from 2009-12-20 on my "rescue" system. I don't
> think I've synched it after that (but I'm too lazy to look up the `find'
> info page to check properly).

cat /usr/portage/metadata/timestamp.chk


--
Neil Bothwick

Politicians are like nappies
Both should be changed regularly, and for the same reason
Attachments: signature.asc (0.19 KB)


wireless at tampabay

Jul 16, 2011, 4:22 PM

Post #8 of 20 (1119 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

Stroller <stroller <at> stellar.eclipse.co.uk> writes:

> in this case the box in question is a PS3 which was installed using the
experimental PS3 stages


Hello Stroller,

I do not have what you seek, but I did run across this link, some
time ago, which might make your efforts much easier to install on
the PS3:


http://www.edn.com/article/518212-The_Sony_PlayStation_3_hack_deciphered_what_consumer_electronics_designers_can_learn_from_the_failure_to_protect_a_billion.php


hth,
James


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 7:12 AM

Post #9 of 20 (1118 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 16 July 2011, at 19:11, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 07/16/2011 12:53 PM, Stroller wrote:
>>
>> I have no illusions that attempting this *will* be a pain the ass,
>> because in the past I've updated machines which have been ignored for
>> 18 months, and that required lots of manually digging in the Portage
>> CVS attic and copying files into the local overlay by hand.
>>
>
> Couldn't you just extract a stage3/snapshot in the root, and then emerge
> -e world? I haven't tried it naturally, but it sounds like a good idea
> to me at this moment.

I guess it may be irrational of me, but I'd really rather not do this because I fear architecture issues with the binaries. I mean, I guess that generic PPC64 binaries should work, and that's what I'll actually end up compiling myself, but I'd still be happier with ones that have been *built* on (or specifically for) a cell.

Stroller.


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 7:40 AM

Post #10 of 20 (1126 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 16 July 2011, at 19:37, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> ...
> I have a /usr/portage from 2009-12-20 on my "rescue" system. I don't
> think I've synched it after that (but I'm too lazy to look up the `find'
> info page to check properly).
>
> Is that any good?

Yeah, that would be fantastic, thanks, Alan.

Could you possibly tar it up and stick it somewhere for me to download?

> As a matter of interest, how, exactly, are you going to use the old
> portage? Is it a matter of updating in two moderate chunks rather than
> everything at once?

Yes, basically.

If I were to `emerge --sync` today and try to `emerge -u world` I would get loads of blockers where the current version of package X depends on package Y version > 2.15. But only version 1.1 of package Y is installed, and the latest version depends on some much newer version of package Z. And the latest version of package Z depends upon something else…

That's the easy part. What tends to happen as you dig through these is that you'll get a bunch of compile time errors because of package version incompatibilities, ones that are undocumented or not listed as version dependencies because no-one ever tried the latest version of package X with a 3 year old version of library Y before.

And I think you also tend to get "middle ground" problems where one package needs a version of another that is higher than 1.1 but lower than 2.5 and neither version are in the tree any more.

I've only done this a couple of times, and never with such a large "leap" as would be required for this system. But each time I really had to play it by ear, got really ugly compile-time package failures and had to sort them out by digging around in the Portage CVS attic. It's not really difficult (for an experienced Gentoo admin) it's just a royal pain, and pretty frustrating (as you solve one problem, only to run into another). And it seemed like trying to be too aggressive in the resolution of the problems made them worse.

So, yes, what I would ideally like to do is update this "6 months at a time". I can find a Portage tree that is 6 months newer than the currently installed system, then all the packages in the new tree will probably have been tested (documented deps &c, clean upgrade path) with the older ones on the system - the versions would have been tested by the Gentoo devs contemporaneously when they were originally in the Portage tree together. When the system is working with the 6 months newer packages, `emerge -e world` (to get *everything* up to date with that time snapshot) and then do the same for a tree another 6 months newer.

This all sounds very time consuming. But updating a typical Gentoo system that is 6 months old doesn't usually present too many problems - the time consuming part is the compilation, which can be left running overnight.

Stroller.


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 7:41 AM

Post #11 of 20 (1119 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 16 July 2011, at 20:14, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Stroller
> <stroller [at] stellar> wrote:
>> A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around, by any chance?
>>
>
> Amazingly enough, I have portage.latest.tar.bz2 dated March 30th,
> 2010. Would that help?


Yeah, that would be fantastic, thanks. Could you put it somewhere I can download it from, please?

Stroller.


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 7:42 AM

Post #12 of 20 (1117 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 16 July 2011, at 21:57, James Cloos wrote:

> I have a clone of the git conversion whose last commit is dated
> Sun Apr 12 21:54:28 2009 +0000, if that is of any help.

Yeah, that would be fantastic, thanks. Could you put it somewhere I can download it from, please?

Feel free to email me directly, rather than everyone cluttering the list with URLs that no-one else will ever use.

Stroller.


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 7:44 AM

Post #13 of 20 (1115 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 16 July 2011, at 22:00, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> ...
> deinstall everything you don't need to install the rest. Then update that base
> system. Afterwards install all the stuff you need.
>
> The less packages installed, the easier the update.

Excellent point! Thank you.

I think once or twice when I did this before I spent time messing around with jpeg libraries, which are not necessary to upgrade a compiler + base system.

Stroller.


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 7:55 AM

Post #14 of 20 (1116 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 17 July 2011, at 00:22, James wrote:
> Stroller <stroller <at> stellar.eclipse.co.uk> writes:
>
>> in this case the box in question is a PS3 which was installed using the
>> experimental PS3 stages
>
>
> Hello Stroller,
>
> I do not have what you seek, but I did run across this link, some
> time ago, which might make your efforts much easier to install on
> the PS3:
>
>
> http://www.edn.com/article/518212-The_Sony_PlayStation_3_hack_deciphered_what_consumer_electronics_designers_can_learn_from_the_failure_to_protect_a_billion.php

Yeah, I'm aware of this news.

The thing is that I'm one of the rare people who never upgraded their PS3 to the first firmware upgrade (3.15?) which removed Linux capabilities.

So I am still "legal" by Sony's definition of the term (much as I disagree with these policies), and would prefer to stay this way.

AIUI there are a bunch of custom firmwares about, either for installing cool media players (or piracy tools) under GamesOS, and some more custom firmwares aimed at making Linux more powerful (by removing the hypervisor restrictions upon it).

But I really don't want to install these in case I decide at some point in the future that I want to install the latest official Sony firmware and Sony detects I've "been running pirate games" and bans the console from the gaming network.

Really, there's no need to update the PS3's firmware because it does everything I need at the moment. The firmware version has no bearing to the existing Linux installation.

Hope this makes sense. Not a criticism of you, and thanks for trying to be helpful.

Stroller.


wireless at tampabay

Jul 17, 2011, 1:42 PM

Post #15 of 20 (1106 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

Stroller <stroller <at> stellar.eclipse.co.uk> writes:


> Hope this makes sense. Not a criticism of you, and
> thanks for trying to be helpful.

Stroller,

I do not even own a PS3. If firmware can be replaced, then
I see no ethical issue in replacing the firmware; after all
it's your hardware and I assume you did not sign a document
saying that you would not upgrade the firmware.


Pirating and such are not my venue either. Staying in Sony's
good graces so as to stay active on their network, is
a personal decision, and I respect that you know what you
want. Furthermore, if you like those vendor provided games
and services, then paying for them is an excellent way
to ensure that software development market maintains
top programming talent and aggressive competition; healthy
no matter how the dollars are sliced up.


Running linux/gentoo on as many different hardware platforms,
as possible, for me, is a kick in the pants every time....
So I'm a strong advocate that all hardware should be allowed
to be customized (via linux etc), as the current owner desires.
This extends the life of hardware and provides an excellent learning
opportunity us all.


enjoy!

James


stroller at stellar

Jul 17, 2011, 4:36 PM

Post #16 of 20 (1110 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 17 July 2011, at 21:42, James wrote:
> … If firmware can be replaced, then
> I see no ethical issue in replacing the firmware;

Indeed.

> ... Staying in Sony's
> good graces so as to stay active on their network, is
> a personal decision, and I respect that you know what you
> want.

Yeah, it's this part. For the moment, at least.

Stroller.


joost at antarean

Jul 20, 2011, 2:03 AM

Post #17 of 20 (1114 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On Saturday 16 July 2011 17:53:48 Stroller wrote:
> A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage snapshots
> kicking around, by any chance?
>
> I have a box which hasn't been updated in 2 - 3 years. It would normally be
> easiest to format and reinstall, but in this case the box in question is a
> PS3 which was installed using the experimental PS3 stages which are (I
> think) no longer available.
>
> I'm pretty sure this machine has some PS3-specific hacks applied, so I think
> an attempt to upgrade the hard way is worthwhile. If it doesn't work I'll
> probably try Debian, or something.
>
> I have no illusions that attempting this *will* be a pain the ass, because
> in the past I've updated machines which have been ignored for 18 months,
> and that required lots of manually digging in the Portage CVS attic and
> copying files into the local overlay by hand.
>
> So if anyone has any Portage snapshots that are sufficiently old left lying
> around from an old install, it would save me that grunt work.
>
> Alternatively, if you, too, have a machine that hasn't been updated a long
> time, maybe you'll be able to help me by tarring up a copy of the Portage
> tree.
>
> Thanks for looking,
>
> Stroller.

Stroller,

If you are still looking, I have the following:

portage-20100128.tar.bz2
portage-latest.tar.bz2 (dated Feb 23, 2010)
portage-20090701.tar.bz2

(Find is still searching the rest of my system, but I think these are probably
it.

--
Joost


thanasis at asyr

Jul 20, 2011, 4:20 AM

Post #18 of 20 (1093 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14040344/7-Oct-2010_portage.tar.bz2


stroller at stellar

Jul 20, 2011, 7:08 AM

Post #19 of 20 (1108 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 20 July 2011, at 10:03, Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> On Saturday 16 July 2011 17:53:48 Stroller wrote:
>> A bit of a long shot, this, but has anyone got any older Portage snapshots
>> kicking around, by any chance?
>>
> ...
> If you are still looking, I have the following:
>
> portage-20100128.tar.bz2
> portage-latest.tar.bz2 (dated Feb 23, 2010)
> portage-20090701.tar.bz2
>
> (Find is still searching the rest of my system, but I think these are probably
> it.

Those might be handy, thanks, Joost.

Could you possibly put them on a web or ftp server, or on rapidshare, or something, and then mail me off-list to let me have the URL?

Stroller.


stroller at stellar

Jul 20, 2011, 7:09 AM

Post #20 of 20 (1092 views)
Permalink
Re: Anyone got any older Portage snapshots kicking around? [In reply to]

On 20 July 2011, at 12:20, Thanasis wrote:

> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14040344/7-Oct-2010_portage.tar.bz2

Got it! Thanks!

Stroller.

Gentoo user RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.