Can't install ...... : can't resolve ......

[Monti]

Hi,

I have just installed the 5.7 -current snapshot with todays date april 15th and are trying to install xfce, but get "Can't install <file_name>: can't resolve <file_names........>" with most of the files/dependencies.

Just to check it out I have also tried to install kde4-minimal, but the same thing happens.

As path I am using:
export PKG_PATH=http://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/packages/$(uname -m)

Command used is pkg_add -Iv <package_name>

I have tried several mirrors, but get the same results. I have also tried switching to platform specific instead of $(uname -m) in the path.

I have previously used version 5.6 without having this specific problem.

If someone could please enlighten me or help me out I would appreciate it.

Thanks,
Monti

[ocicat]

Originally Posted by Monti

I have just installed the 5.7 -current snapshot with todays date april 15th and are trying to install xfce, but get "Can't install <file_name>: can't resolve <file_names........>" with most of the files/dependencies.

You didn't state what platform you are using.

• amd64 xfce* packages are dated 15 April on the main mirror site.
• i386 xfce* packages are dated 12 April on the mail mirror.

Given the little information provided, I would assume that either:

• The mirror site you are using is behind the main site, or...
• Packages are lagging behind the snapshot of the base system installed.

Snapshots of the base system can be built in a few hours on the popular platforms. Packages can take days to weeks.

When using -current, this is a common scenario. You can either wait for new packages to be made available, or you can build what packages are needed. Section 15.3 will give you information on how to build packages yourself.

[Monti]

Thank you very much for your reply Ocicat.

From the positive experience with 5.6 I suspected that it could be a common scenario with -current and that it had something to do with the different dates, but needed confirmation from someone with experience. From what you wrote, until I will have a positive experience I will assume it is the packages lagging behind the snapshot

Thanks for the link.

- Monti

[albator]

PKG_PATH shows that the main site is used. Be aware that it might be faster to use a mirror.

At the time of writing, packages are lagging behind both for amd64 and i386:
amd64/
system: 15-Apr-2015 15:43 - packages: 15-Apr-2015 05:08
i386/
system: 15-Apr-2015 15:50 - packages: 15-Apr-2015 14:23

[Monti]

Thanks for the update Albator.

To get confirmation with my own experience I downloaded the latest system snapshot iso with an earlier april 15th time stamp from the Aalborg .dk mirror and then used main site for packages. The xfce is now almost finished with no previous problems.

[ocicat]

Because -current is the project's development branch, issues like this are to be expected given the file volatility.

Those that use -current are expected to deal with these possible mismatches. Some may find this to be inconvenient or troublesome, & in this case, they can always use -release or -stable. -current isn't for everyone.

[Monti]

Thanks for the follow up Ocicat. It's good to know.

I think OpenBSD is such an interesting OS/project, so I don't mind learning and adapting to the distinctive features.

[hitest]

Originally Posted by ocicat

Those that use -current are expected to deal with these possible mismatches. Some may find this to be inconvenient or troublesome, & in this case, they can always use -release or -stable. -current isn't for everyone.

I am intrigued with -current, but, I am still a novice user so I am sticking with -release. I will eventually venture into the deep end. Two weeks until 5.7!

[batence]

dhclient <re0>
/or what is your lan card/ and then
export PKG_PATH=http://ftp.usa.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/`uname -r`/packages/`arch -s`

[ibara]

Originally Posted by batence

dhclient <re0>
/or what is your lan card/ and then
export PKG_PATH=http://ftp.usa.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/`uname -r`/packages/`arch -s`

That will not work in this case. Please read the FAQ.

[LeFrettchen]

Originally Posted by hitest

I am intrigued with -current, but, I am still a novice user so I am sticking with -release. I will eventually venture into the deep end. Two weeks until 5.7!

I use OpenBSD since 2011 and I totally agree

Originally Posted by ibara

Please read the FAQ.

Best advice ever for OpenBSD

[ibara]

I debated whether or not I should reply to this post with the pedantic answer. But since everyone seems to be hung up on dates, perhaps I should be a bit pedantic for the sake of maybe explaining why checking dates is a useful heuristic but not the be-all-end-all.

What's actually going on is that the package system knows what version of each library each port is built against. If during that check it finds a mismatch, the installation will bail. As it should. Because there's no guarantee that mismatches will work (especially true for major version mismatches).

And different libraries have different impact factors. A libc bump basically means no packages are going to work (except for those that are truly no-arch). But something like sqlite3 gets bumped and you'll still be able to install a lot. It's an important reminder that if you're following -current, you want to be subscribed to source-changes@ and you want to actually read source-changes@. You will also get a feel for the release cycle and know when dates mean less/more.

Of course, this advise is only useful for archs where packages can be pumped out quickly. For those of us with slower archs, it's an always-build-ports deal.