Well the first thing in my hooks line is systemd so it makes sense, at least to me, to use systemd fsck.
I’ve replaced base-hook with systemd-hook myself.
was only a suggestion, with the sole premise being rootfs only mounted once(pimping boot process :-p) it is the default mechanism afterall. as for, if there is any advantage, don’t know.
who knows what fsck-hook does, maybe it does indeed mount rootfs in RO mode and it’s hidden from the logs (my sole evidence that it is mounted once)
1 Like
systemd-modules-load[360]: Failed to find module 'amd_pstate'
when using linux61 6.1.0rc7-1
EDIT:
systemd-modules-load[360]: Failed to find module 'amd_pstate'
when using linux61 (6.1.0rc8-1)
…because of Riesen, I know… 
EDIT2:
following a hint of stephane 
the amd-pstate works in kernel6.1.0-1 by adding additional boot-parameter:
amd_pstate=passive
1 Like
Module is disable on 6.1-rc7 for a reason I guess.
Update from René about the AMD-P-State Driver:
1 Like
Is there anyone having the same error
pamac upgrade --force-refresh
Preparing...
Synchronizing package databases...
Refreshing core.db...
Refreshing extra.db...
Refreshing community.db...
Refreshing multilib.db...
Refreshing core.files...
Refreshing extra.files...
Refreshing community.files...
Refreshing multilib.files...
https://aur.manjaro.org/packages-meta-ext-v1.json.gz: Unacceptable TLS certificate
Failed to synchronize AUR database
``Yes: Pamac fails to synchronise due unacceptable TLS certificate
Wait a few minutes and try again.
1 Like
I think this is temporary but nevertheless:
paru
:: Synchronizing package databases...
core 164.1 KiB 157 KiB/s 00:01 [#############################################] 100%
extra 1866.6 KiB 19.4 MiB/s 00:00 [#############################################] 100%
community 7.5 MiB 59.2 MiB/s 00:00 [#############################################] 100%
multilib 168.9 KiB 8.25 MiB/s 00:00 [#############################################] 100%
repo-ck is up to date
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: installing libxnvctrl (525.60.11-2) breaks dependency 'libXNVCtrl.so=0-64' required by conky
Well that’s odd. libxnvctrl provides libXNVCtrl.so, not libXNVCtrl.so=0-64. However, it shouldn’t make any difference. Are you using pamac or pacman?
2 posts were split to a new topic: Installing libxnvctrl (525.60.11-2) breaks dependency ‘libXNVCtrl.so=0-64’ required by conky
@Yochanan
bash 5.2.0 is apparently breaking makepkg:
https://lists.archlinux.org/archives/list/arch-dev-public@lists.archlinux.org/thread/JTLMTWDKUITZVPAU3BL3OQPE7R7CHDIH/
Granted, that is for Arch but I don’t see any patches being applied to Manjaros bash build.
Seems to be downgraded in the Manjaro repos now
1 Like
Today’s updates were interrupted by:
python-cairo: /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/cairo/__pycache__/__init__.cpython-310.pyc exists in filesystem
Seems the file was created in the system just yesterday. Had to remove/rename it to proceed.
the path looks like cache contained only.
I would try to reboot PC (in order to close all active running apps), then to remove it’s all content and to retry upgrade.
(Yes, I saw your solution with the only single file deletion in your post above, but we aware that a cache files could prevent new versions to work normally (sometimes KDE stuff could be example of it)).
New one was generated in its place. I renamed the old file, just in case.
The file was previously not part of the package, now it is.
Remove it, no need to rename it or back it up. It’s only cached compiled byte code.
EDIT: Added to the current #announcements:testing-updates wiki:
So since current version, [some / all] content of the __pycache__ path should not be removed manually cause now even those cached files are a part of current package version content? Wow.
How good is to provide cache files inside of a package? For me it looks like spamming package content with the data, which could be easily auto-generated on any user’s end.
Moreover: what content does that cached files store? It is non user-unique but shared for all users, thus it does not represent full cache state of all python applications on a user PC. So such built-in cache files could be only as a partial cache state.
To include cache files into a package installer looks like unwanted package content.
It’s actually the opposite. Compiling the byte code and including it in the package makes programs run faster.
Also…
…it can be useful when installing modules for shared use, especially if some of the users may not have permission to write the byte-code cache files in the directory containing the source code.
– py_compile — Compile Python source files — Python 3.11.0 documentation
See also https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2998215/if-python-is-interpreted-what-are-pyc-files
Just in case someone did not (yet) notice here on unstable:
Those who have not a graphic card will be affected?
Everybody has a GPU implementation.
Otherwise there is no any video signal output available from a PC.
A GPU could be:
-) dedicated as inject-able module into AGP / PCI / PCIe internal ports;
-) as compact separate chip soldered down on a motherboard;
-) as iGPU - video cores integrated into a CPU chip (located on it’s substrate).
1 Like