On 07/27/16 09:17, Ben Woods wrote: > On Wednesday, 27 July 2016, Matthew Seaman <matt...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> >> Interesting. I've just seen exactly the same thing when trying to >> update my CURRENT VM. It's the transition from FreeBSD:11:amd64 to >> FreeBSD:12:amd64 which seems to be the root cause. >> >> The old 'freebsd:12:x86:64' ABI style is something that pkg(8) moved >> away from many years ago. It appears in the package metadata as 'arch': >> >> # pkg info -RF FreeBSD-lib-12.0.s20160727061717.txz | head -10 >> name: "FreeBSD-lib" >> origin: "base" >> version: "12.0.s20160727061717" >> comment: "lib package" >> maintainer: "r...@freebsd.org" >> www: "https://www.FreeBSD.org"; >> abi: "FreeBSD:12:amd64" >> arch: "freebsd:12:x86:64" <<<----*** >> prefix: "/" >> flatsize: 106186 >> >> which I believe is more significant for certain ARM and MIPS >> architectures: i386 and amd64 only have one architecture variant apiece. >> >> Still, curious about how to get over this major version number bump. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Matthew >> > > Hi Matthew, > > Please see right at the bottom of the PkgBase wiki page where I have > explained how to get around the one time ABI bump during major upgrades. > > https://wiki.freebsd.org/PkgBase#Major_Version_Upgrades > > Regards, > Ben > >
Hmmm... where essentially the command you propose is:
# env ABI=freebsd:12:x86:64 pkg upgrade -r FreeBSD-base
Unfortunately this doesn't work:
codling:/home/matthew:# env ABI=freebsd:12:x86:64 pkg upgrade -r
FreeBSD-base
pkg: Warning: Major OS version upgrade detected. Running "pkg-static
install -f pkg" recommended
Updating FreeBSD-base repository catalogue...
Repository FreeBSD-base has a wrong packagesite, need to re-create database
pkg: file:///usr/obj/usr/src/repo/freebsd:12:x86:64/latest/meta.txz: No
such file or directory
repository FreeBSD-base has no meta file, using default settings
pkg:
file:///usr/obj/usr/src/repo/freebsd:12:x86:64/latest/packagesite.txz:
No such file or directory
Unable to update repository FreeBSD-base
All repositories are up-to-date.
pkg: Repository FreeBSD-base cannot be opened. 'pkg update' required
Checking for upgrades (0 candidates): 100%
Processing candidates (0 candidates): 100%
Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting)
Your packages are up to date.
'freebsd:12:x86:64' is the old-style ABI format that went out in about
pkg-1.5.x or pkg-1.6.x or so and is now known inside pkg(8) as ALTABI.
codling:/home/matthew:# pkg -vv | grep ABI
ABI = "FreeBSD:11:amd64";
ALTABI = "freebsd:11:x86:64";
The base repo directory is named using the new style ABI:
codling:/home/matthew:# ls -la /usr/obj/usr/src/repo/
total 12
drwxr-xr-x 3 matthew wheel 512 Jul 27 07:14 ./
drwxr-xr-x 23 matthew wheel 512 Jul 26 17:43 ../
drwxr-xr-x 3 root wheel 512 Jul 27 07:32 FreeBSD:12:amd64/
Even so:
codling:/home/matthew:# env ABI=FreeBSD:12:amd64 pkg upgrade -r FreeBSD-base
pkg: Warning: Major OS version upgrade detected. Running "pkg-static
install -f pkg" recommended
Updating FreeBSD-base repository catalogue...
Fetching meta.txz: 100% 264 B 0.3kB/s 00:01
Fetching packagesite.txz: 100% 48 KiB 49.0kB/s 00:01
Processing entries: 0%
pkg: wrong architecture: freebsd:12:x86:64 instead of FreeBSD:12:amd64
pkg: repository FreeBSD-base contains packages with wrong ABI:
freebsd:12:x86:64
Processing entries: 100%
Unable to update repository FreeBSD-base
All repositories are up-to-date.
pkg: Repository FreeBSD-base cannot be opened. 'pkg update' required
Checking for upgrades (0 candidates): 100%
Processing candidates (0 candidates): 100%
Checking integrity... done (0 conflicting)
Your packages are up to date.
I think I may need a 'pkg-static' compiled under 12.0 to make this work,
which is an interesting chicken-and-egg problem.
There does seem to be some confusion between 'Architecture' and 'ABI'.
Do we need to introduce a concept of 'Architecture' for some base system
packages? This would say what sort of system hardware a kernel package
could be installed on, like so: 'x86:64' or 'mips:be' (notice this says
nothing about FreeBSD or FreeBSD's major version level.) Then we'd need
some sort of additional logic for working for out what ABIs are
compatible with what Architectures and also a new magic variable
${ARCHITECTURE} for the low-level base system bits, analogous to ${ABI}.
Cheers,
Matthew
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
