[Patch] Using MACHINE_ARCH identifiers in pkg

[olli hauer]

On 2014-08-18 18:15, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
> 
> On 08/14/14 13:40, olli hauer wrote:
>> On 2014-08-14 21:42, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>>> On 8/14/2014 2:38 PM, olli hauer wrote:
>>>> On 2014-08-14 17:35, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> Something I've mentioned to Bapt a few times is that pkg needs a way to
>>> have a list of accepted ABI strings. Then we could add both the old and
>>> the new style as accepted (internally) so that old and new repositories
>>> will continue to work.
>>>
>> Ups, rollback is not possible after the client database was updated.
>>
>> Even by rollback and rebuild the package metadata the following error pops up.
>>
>> ~/pkg-static.old_ABI update -f
>> Updating repository catalogue
>> pkg-static: Repository str has a wrong packagesite, need to re-create database
>> Fetching meta.txz: 100% of 584 B
>> Fetching digests.txz: 100% of 43 kB
>> Fetching packagesite.txz: 100% of 138 kB
>>
>> Adding new entries: 34%
>> pkg-static: wrong architecture: FreeBSD:8:amd64 instead of freebsd:8:x86:64
>>
>> pkg-static: repository str contains packages with wrong ABI: FreeBSD:8:amd64
>> Adding new entries: 100%
>> pkg-static: Unable to update repository str
> 
> 
> Hm. I'm not sure how to handle this. There are two places that emit hard errors in such cases: pkg-add, which is fine since we have a workaround there, and here. The check is at line 446 of libpkg/repo/binary/update.c (you can comment it out for testing). For this one, there does not seem to be any good solution and we need to find one since this is the same issue you ran into the upgrade path.
> 
> Here are the two options I see. They are similar to each other, and we could do both for some time.
> 1. Make an intermediate pkg that is otherwise unaltered but doesn't have this check during updates and keep it in the tree for some substantial length of time so most people have it by the time we want upgrades to the new ABI strings.
> 2. Set PKGNG_ALTABI globally on the ports tree for i386 and amd64 for some period of time so that all built packages get the current ABI identifiers rather than the new ones.
> 
> Any preference here? Or other options?


Hi Nathan,

Your suggestion 2) could do the trick, at last for current ports.

I will see if I can do some additional tests the next days, specially with mixed ABI strings in the packages.

-- 
olli