Worrisome output from "opkg -test update" in 2007.2
dale.schumacher at gmail.com
Sun Aug 3 15:52:44 CEST 2008
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 6:35 AM, Jeffrey Ratcliffe
<jeffrey.ratcliffe at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/8/2 Olivier Berger <oberger at ouvaton.org>:
>> Doing an opkg remove gtk+-fastscaling and opkg upgrade gtk+ solved the
>> issue, I think. YMMV though.
> I needed
> opkg remove -force-depends gtk+-fastscaling
> but otherwise this sorted out the error messages.
Thank you. I really appreciate the work-around for gtk+.
However I think this represents an example of a deeper issue. How
many -force-depends, -nodeps or remove foo / install bar are we
expecting new users to navigate when trying to upgrade from their
factory configurations? Is it not possible to get the package
dependencies properly defined so that opkg will "just work"? If not,
then I suppose that would lead to a whole series of work-arounds
(hopefully documented on the wiki) that a new user would be expected
to find and apply to their factory-configured device. Already we have
a fairly critical requirement to flash a new u-boot (not mentioned in
"getting started"). If we expect a new users to start by flashing a
"recent" kernel and/or rootfs, we should say that in "getting
started". What about users like me that have tried to keep current
strictly with opkg (except for the u-boot re-flash) to avoid stomping
on locally changed configuration options, locally developed helper
And finally, what about the chain of messages like:
Upgrading task-base-kernel26 on root from 1.0-r69 to 1.0-r71...
task-base-kernel26: unsatisfied recommendation for kernel-module-input
task-base-kernel26: unsatisfied recommendation for kernel-module-rtc-dev
task-base-kernel26: unsatisfied recommendation for kernel-module-rtc-proc
task-base-kernel26: unsatisfied recommendation for kernel-module-rtc-sysfs
task-base-kernel26: unsatisfied recommendation for kernel-module-rtc-sa1100
task-base-kernel26: unsatisfied recommendation for kernel-module-unix
How is a new user, or even a someone like me, to know if this is a
cause for concern? Given the experiences of many on this list that an
upgrade sometimes results in an unusable system, requiring a re-flash,
I have understandable fears about blinding upgrading without
understanding the consequences of messages like these.
More information about the support