| 1 |
On 04/01/2018 08:40, Wols Lists wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 03/01/18 22:09, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 04/01/2018 00:02, Stroller wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>>> On 3 Jan 2018, at 21:55, Wols Lists <antlists@××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>> |
| 7 |
>>>> What would be nice, would be if "emerge --depclean" had the smarts to |
| 8 |
>>>> recognise that /usr/src/linux pointed to the current active kernel, and |
| 9 |
>>>> didn't wipe that when it cleaned out everything else :-) That way, at |
| 10 |
>>>> most you could have the current and latest kernel sources available |
| 11 |
>>>> pretty easily. |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>>> You've jogged a long-hibernating memory - the accidental removal of the current sources tree in an accident like this may be the exact reason why I refuse to allow kernel versions to be actively emerged. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> I think that's a mountain and a molehill. You still have the image in |
| 16 |
>> /boot, config in /boot or in the running kernel, libs in /lib/modules |
| 17 |
>> and the bootloader is intact. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Delete the sources? |
| 20 |
>> - Re-emerge them. 90 seconds. |
| 21 |
>> - Re-compile using existing config. 20 minutes |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> So deleting the sources for the running kernel is a doh! moment. But no |
| 24 |
>> biggie, and certainly not cause for changing your routine (all in my own |
| 25 |
>> not at all humble opinion, of course) |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
> But it's a royal pain, especially if you don't realise that's what's |
| 28 |
> happened, because a general emerge is likely to have a lot of grief. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Yes there is that |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Dunno how many ebuilds actually refer to /usr/src/linux for some of |
| 34 |
> their header files, but I doubt it's negligible. It's certainly caused |
| 35 |
> me grief in the past. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
It's a decidedly non-trivial number of ebuilds. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
On Gentoo /usr/src is a symlink to the *configured* kernel sources, on |
| 40 |
binary distros the same dir usually contains headers for the running kernel |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
> (Yes I think they're not supposed to, but what's that saying about |
| 43 |
> theory and practice?) |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
I don't know of any documentation in Gentoo that says ebuilds shouldn't |
| 46 |
do that but I can't think of any realistic alternatives. Gentoo needs |
| 47 |
access to the kernel config not just the sources and we can't rely on a |
| 48 |
config being present in /boot like binary distros can |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> I don't like it when well-known problems cause general breakage that is |
| 52 |
> likely to cause havoc for unsuspecting users... |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Gentoo has always had a fallback excuse position for devs: |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
By running Gentoo you give up all right to claiming to be an |
| 57 |
"unsuspecting user" |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Harsh I know, and sucky when it hits you, but it is what it is. |
| 60 |
Gentoo is not for the faint-hearted |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 66 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives