From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Nov 9 14:40:06 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4F9CC38F81 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 14:40:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stdin@niklaas.eu) Received: from mx.box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu (mx.box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu [84.22.110.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A5FA1C9 for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 14:40:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stdin@niklaas.eu) Received: from box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu (unknown [10.77.0.1]) by mx.box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E84C4F99AA for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:40:02 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=niklaas.eu; s=default; t=1478702402; bh=bSRGLkUpLKtecXKd5Vje8qlyWEKSXebkefFhfBTxWWk=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Reply-To:In-Reply-To; b=BT9EFS+XWo2BqKBA5ETx3V7TWb5bWP/DFFypOZNwoRne2t50M8NUCoRSMQv1oXQTt NZQOy1UI7D26qIj64+I22CZ1tltwbSHzsfYIVaevodBAB8pVxphrTCnW1OvxRyNYL5 ds825fCuHsP9aCA+G0HIcPzlLF2K8Ltww+U0OKg0= Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 15:40:02 +0100 From: Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: After perl upgrade: "Can't locate XML/Parser.pm in @INC" Message-ID: <20161109144002.6uu3t6hbdcjafuav@box-hlm-03.niklaas.eu> Reply-To: stdin@niklaas.eu Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8d178a83-f0e1-687d-dd6c-ef50239287b7@FreeBSD.org> <20161108175939.GB8641@lime.woodcruft.co.uk> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161003 (1.7.0) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 14:40:06 -0000 Frank Shute [2016-11-08 17:59 +0000] : > With regards to mixing packages built with poudriere and those from the > official repository; I think that's all very well if you accept the default > options in poudriere. Once you start choosing your own options with poudriere > you're going to end up in knots because you're likely to end up in dependency > hell. > > My advice: stick with either packages from the official repositories or from > poudriere but not both. Even if I configure the repositories with different priorities? Of course, it makes sense to me that one repository is much less complex and thus less vulnerable to (dependency) conflicts. However, I decided for multiple repositories because I thought it doesn't make sense for me to build a package with the same options as built somewhere else. So I thought I could fetch the ones that use the options I need from the official repository. pkg.conf(5) even says: CONSERVATIVE_UPGRADE: boolean Ensure in multi repository mode that the priority is given as much as possible to the reposi- tory where a package was first installed from. Default: YES. To me this sounds like pkg is intended to be used with multiple repositories. > Personally, I now just stick with poudriere and configure the ports with my > own options. Even though this machine (my strongest) isn't anything > sensational: i5, 16GB, 80GB SSD, it still manages to build 542 ports/packages > with plenty to spare and I can also distribute the packages to weaker hardware > via http. Yes, I also feed multiple machines from one central package builder that isn't very strong either. But until now I've only used the builder for some packages that I need. Markus Hoenicka [2016-11-08 16:45 +0100] : > your XML/Parser module is installed in .../mach/5.24/... but your Perl > include path contains only the older versions .../5.20/... . So, Perl > rightfully complains that it's not "there". You seem to have two Perl > distributions installed in parallel, and some modules belong to the old, > others to the newer Perl. Unless a manual cleanup (deinstalling 5.20 and > associated modules) is successful, it might be prudent to deinstall all > things Perl and reinstall the new version with all the modules you need. Matthew Seaman [2016-11-08 15:49 +0000] : > What version does ```perl -v``` return with? If it's perl-5.20 then, > correct, there is no XML::Parser available, as that has been installed > in a perl-5.24 specific subdirectory of ${PERL5LIB} That was the case indeed. > If it's perl-5.24 that you want I suggest: > > # pkg delete -f perl5-5.20.3_15 perl5.24-5.24.1.r4 > # pkg install perl5 > > Assuming you're using the latest pre-compiled packages (and not the ones > from the quarterly branch which still have 5.20 as the default version.) > Or build and install a new perl-5.24 package. It's important to > re-install perl 5.24 as removing perl5-5.20 may have removed some > important files from the existing 5.24 package. This kind of solved the issue. At least I have a working perl distribution again. Thank you! What I don't understand though (maybe someone can help me with that) is why pkg wants to downgrade perl to its previous version if I issue `pkg upgrade`. See (extract): Installed packages to be DOWNGRADED: perl5: 5.24.1.r4 -> 5.20.3_13 [niklaas.eu-dev] niklaas.eu-dev is the repository I use when porting. I only update it (ports tree and packages) when I need it for testing. It's priority is the lowest. What could make pkg to decide to downgrade perl again? Niklaas