OpenWrt Forum Archive

Topic: Issues installing package with opkg

The content of this topic has been archived on 17 Apr 2018. There are no obvious gaps in this topic, but there may still be some posts missing at the end.

Need a lil help here if anyone can please, been trying to build a router setup with 3g/4g and cups print server support (with the intent of getting it to support air print for a usb printer) on a Wr710n v2.1 (8meg flash), I've been using ROOter as a base then adding in the unofficial openwrt printing packages feed from https://github.com/FranciscoBorges/open … g-packages also using extroot to give 8gig to overlay 512m to swap and an extra data partition of another 8gig which are correct mounted.

The issue is though it compiles all fine and the majority of packages install (had to update fontconfig to later version as it was causing a weird fs-cache error) when I come to to install ghostscript on the router it fails, first throwing sha256sum mismatched, so I forced checksum ignore, reinstall, overwrite and fresh config, I've rebuilt the router more than once and was starting to bang my head in frustration till I noticed this

Downloading file:/data/printer/packages/printing/ghostscript_9.06-2_ar71xx.ipk.
Ignored ghostscript sha256sum mismatch.
Configuring ghostscript.
Collected errors:
* copy_file_chunk: Unable to read all data
* set_flags_from_control: Failed to open //usr/lib/opkg/info/ghostscript.control: No such file or directory.

I tried again forcing a diff install location just to see if it would make any difference

Downloading file:/data/printer/packages/printing/ghostscript_9.06-2_ar71xx.ipk.
Ignored ghostscript sha256sum mismatch.
Configuring ghostscript.
Collected errors:
* copy_file_chunk: Unable to read all data
* set_flags_from_control: Failed to open /data/tmp//usr/lib/opkg/info/ghostscript.control: No such file or directory.

Any insights or help much appreciated

(Last edited by toxfire on 7 May 2016, 10:12)

Be so kind to contact the package owner / maintainer as this is not relevant to OpenWrt.

Actually found out the issue, when opkg was downloading the package it was consuming all of the ram and failing to complete the fail download somewhat silently direct install from the package file worked perfectly.

Max Hopper wrote:

Be so kind to contact the package owner / maintainer as this is not relevant to OpenWrt.

toxfire wrote:

Actually found out the issue, when opkg was downloading the package it was consuming all of the ram and failing to complete the fail download somewhat silently direct install from the package file worked perfectly.

Sorry if I snapped at ya, I've been dealing with some stressful religious issues and snapping at ya wasn't very Christian of me.

toxfire wrote:
Max Hopper wrote:

Be so kind to contact the package owner / maintainer as this is not relevant to OpenWrt.

toxfire wrote:

Actually found out the issue, when opkg was downloading the package it was consuming all of the ram and failing to complete the fail download somewhat silently direct install from the package file worked perfectly.

Sorry if I snapped at ya, I've been dealing with some stressful religious issues and snapping at ya wasn't very Christian of me.

Ah, Max Hopper is quite peculiar about what he considers to be appropriate for this forum and not shy to voice his opinion; most of the other regulars here do not seem to share this specific flavor of "zealotry" (we all have our own foibles I guess, just different from this one). I like to think most users here are quite forgiving about a potential mis-placed posting, worst thing that happens typically is that you get no response if nobody feels capable of responding.

Your issue is a good example why I personally get annoyed with Max's postings, if the error you encountered, failure to properly note and inform about an out of memory condition during use of one of openwrt's system tools (opkg), is off-topic for this forum section, I do not know what would suit it.

Best Regards
        M.

That the OPer mistook that RAM of the device was exhausted, which is according to the OPer is backed by 512MB swap, for the /tmpfs, also backed by RAM, and through a series of trial and error actions -

toxfire wrote:

... so I forced checksum ignore, reinstall, overwrite and fresh config, I've rebuilt the router more than once ...

without first RTFW for the operation of opkg, but clearly gleaned enough knowledge to bypass its control mechanism, for the documented behaviour of opkg with -

toxfire wrote:

... the unofficial openwrt printing packages ...

is sufficient reason to redirect the support request to the package maintainer.

Max Hopper wrote:

That the OPer mistook that RAM of the device was exhausted, which is according to the OPer is backed by 512MB swap, for the /tmpfs, also backed by RAM, and through a series of trial and error actions -

toxfire wrote:

... so I forced checksum ignore, reinstall, overwrite and fresh config, I've rebuilt the router more than once ...

without first RTFW for the operation of opkg, but clearly gleaned enough knowledge to bypass its control mechanism, for the documented behaviour of opkg with -

toxfire wrote:

... the unofficial openwrt printing packages ...

is sufficient reason to redirect the support request to the package maintainer.

Look Max, I was not directing my post towards you, by now I realize we have different opinions that we in all likelihood will not be able to reconcile; so I stopped worrying about that option...
        I did want to signal to the OP that your post)s) does not reflect an official forum policy, I believe I conveyed that information.
        I have learned (some time ago) that if behavior in a peer group starts deviating from one's idea of decent/acceptable manners one needs to actively take counter measures; and as I want this forum to be a nice and civil place where posters treat each other with courtesy and respect...

Best Regards
        M.

moeller0 wrote:

        I have learned (some time ago) that if behavior in a peer group starts deviating from one's idea of decent/acceptable manners one needs to actively take counter measures; and as I want this forum to be a nice and civil place where posters treat each other with courtesy and respect...

Right, indeed.

Demonstration of civility by RTFW first fits that definition, no?

Max Hopper wrote:
moeller0 wrote:

        I have learned (some time ago) that if behavior in a peer group starts deviating from one's idea of decent/acceptable manners one needs to actively take counter measures; and as I want this forum to be a nice and civil place where posters treat each other with courtesy and respect...

Right, indeed.

Demonstration of civility by RTFW first fits that definition, no?

Max it might be true that some posters could have solved their issues by doing a bit of (re-)search before/instead of posting to the forums, yet an additional post to the forum, even if it repeats an already solved issue does not do any harm, does it? Thanks to the technology you keep pointing people towards: internet search; google does a fine job of helping to find even multiple threads for similar topics... (If I could wish for something, it would be that all OPs hang through to their threads until the issue is solved and then add [SOLVED} to the topic/title that would make forum search more fun, but I digress)
        But telling people to RTFM first certainly is neither civil nor nice behavior in my opinion, rather the words rude and premature come to mind. Unfortunately your actions, words (in another thread) and even your signature make it clear that this behavor is not accidental but that you are waging a campaign to "improve" the forums. While I applaud the eeffort to improve things I disagree with your definition of improvement.
       And let's face it, the OP in this thread handled himself quite well and gracefully; neither me nor you made a good show for the forum regulars (so thee is lots to improve behavior-wise for me as well)...

Best Regards
        M.

moeller0, you are wasting you time. You see where discussions with him lead: Nowhere. Therefore simply ignore this guy.
Ignoring the one who claims to combat ignorance, because he doesn't know how to behave, is the best thing you can do. It's funny to see that this combat results in the opposite than what's desired, like f*cking for virginity.

tmo26 wrote:

moeller0, you are wasting you time. You see where discussions with him lead: Nowhere. Therefore simply ignore this guy.
Ignoring the one who claims to combat ignorance, because he doesn't know how to behave, is the best thing you can do. It's funny to see that this combat results in the opposite than what's desired, like f*cking for virginity.

Hi Tmo26,

I guess, you are right, Max is a lost cause, as he seems to believe to behave in the "one true and righteous way". As he explained in another post he justifies his lack of manners and hostility as measures to help people to learn to help themselves (yes he truly found a way to convince himself that "playing the forum troll" actually is a friendly and generous act of support; so probability of him settling in with the general laisser-faire and open friendlyness of the forums is pretty low).
        Actually, I do not aim at influencing Max's behavior any longer (for some time now); all I want to achieve is to ameliorate the "damage" his attitude does towards, mostly new, poster to this forum. It would be a shame if his "zealotry" would scare away people and make them afraid to ask for advice and help. All of use started at some point as novices I assume so scaring the novices of today will reduce the potential set of the masters of tomorrow (and people will just contribute to friendlier projects)...

Best Regards
        M.

The discussion might have continued from here.