From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Wed Nov 4 07:35:50 2015 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 A701BA263E2 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 07:35:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gibblertron@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F8C41D52; Wed, 4 Nov 2015 07:35:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gibblertron@gmail.com) Received: by lfbf136 with SMTP id f136so36320988lfb.0; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:35:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=0sgatvui83GuTQTrDgJM4ckhs7QoCh6SaIDgNWpkws8=; b=awKzRAGDF2FUxrG7myVu7ZYMztwO3ky6g8V6KV9+dX1MeH7jUIYUh6Fd485HQSzp4/ o2ErqT6cK5xNIxdrwS+TLlU8JYm44D6gK73X14I7VOQqEXC6HWaeF67y75ZN9cdSAqFW yvXhxG3j1PUHLa+ts8tyNCdMqDUksaFySTTiATg9KaFfQyaG6wUYcik+E6ziEkpHLGD8 RxTT3bVBhgxIPFkv4qQLPr9OFn5xnpwLZSP23qowUMnL+W4x2hJGtaaL9ZxwYLIZTbz0 ird2p0n00hXJTH/5clLuzu6gOUqti/JfGw4Q1XjxwvsHi3ud/8xNMvoLjl373Ic4ezQX v/aA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.25.158.211 with SMTP id h202mr17485lfe.29.1446622548305; Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:35:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.25.164.15 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 23:35:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56389DC3.4000404@FreeBSD.org> References: <56389DC3.4000404@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 23:35:48 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: /usr/sbin/pkg broken after 10.1 to 10.2 upgrade From: Patrick Gibson To: Matthew Seaman Cc: FreeBSD Questions Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 07:35:50 -0000 On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 3:42 AM, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Hmmm.... while pkg(8) uses UCL, it has its own copy of the UCL code > built into itself and doesn't need libucl.so.1. You cannot get this > error message from pkg(8). > > However the pkg(7) shim built into the system as /usr/sbin/pkg *does* > use /usr/lib/private/libucl.so.1 and that is what is printing out the > error message you're seeing. > > This means that your attempt to upgrade has not completed > satisfactorily: you are missing necessary bits of the base system. > Concentrate on fixing that first. Yep, it's pretty clear the update did not complete successfully (despite not complaining at all). I downloaded and manually installed files from base.txz in the 10.2-RELEASE distribution. /usr/sbin/pkg is no longer complaining. The INDEX-OLD and INDEX-NEW files left from the 10.1 -> 10.2 freebsd-update process had no mention of /usr/lib/private/libucl.so.1, though there were entries for other libs in that private dir. Bizarre! I've had no previous issues doing release updates with freebsd-update before (besides the manual merging of config files that have different commit version messages)...