Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Brian <dol-sen@×××××.net>
To: gentoo-portage-dev <gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] kernel drivers vs. portage
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 06:38:48
Message-Id: 1073371301.3689.11.camel@big_squirt.dol-sen.ca
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] kernel drivers vs. portage by Paul Varner
1 On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 09:30, Paul Varner wrote:
2 > On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 09:17, Marius Mauch wrote:
3 > > On 01/04/04 Drake Wyrm wrote:
4 > >
5 > > > What? No opinions, or everybody thinks I'm too much of an idiot to
6 > > > bother answering?
7 > >
8 > > I think Daniel fixed that already by using the 'don't unmerge' feature
9 > > of CONFIG_PROTECT for /lib/modules.
10 >
11 > It is fixed in the version of portage that is in CVS, but the fix still
12 > hasn't made it to the versions of portage that are marked stable. In
13 > the CVS tree it was placed in version 1.345 of portage.py. The version
14 > that is being distributed is currently 1.341 (See my comments at the end
15 > of bug #1477)
16 >
17 > A manual work around that I have tested is to use env
18 > CONFIG_PROTECT="/lib/modules" when re-emerging packages such as
19 > alsa-driver for a new kernel. However, I don't recommend placing it
20 > into the make.conf as typically you only want to protect the
21 > /lib/modules directory when doing the above.
22 >
23 > I also would like portage-ng to handle kernel modules dependencies in a
24 > more automated fashion. Someone commented that revdep-rebuild was a
25 > hack to get around some of the dependency shortcomings in the current
26 > version of portage. The kernelmod-rebuild script that I recently wrote
27 > is also such a hack.
28 >
29 > I didn't comment on the previous message as I didn't see anything that I
30 > disagreed with from a requirements perspective.
31 >
32 > Regards,
33 > Paul
34 --
35 Thank you for working out this problem. I, for a second thought I may
36 have instigated a change in portage for the better, but seeing the above
37 metioned bug I see it dates back much farther. Even the fix has been
38 done for several months.
39
40 Again, thank you for the hard work to improve portage.
41
42 A side note: Could changes, such as added features, or changed
43 functionality in core projects such as portage be announced in the GWN
44 as they make it to stable. (If it is not already normal) It may be one
45 of the best ways for users to learn about such changes.
46
47 --
48 Brian <dol-sen@×××××.net>
49
50
51 --
52 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list