| 1 |
On 12/08/2013 13:37, Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2013-08-12 6:48 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 12/08/2013 12:19, Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Hmmm... so is it eudev that would need to be updated to 'fix' this? Or |
| 5 |
>>> virtual/udev? Or both? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
>> It has to do with how virtuals work. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> If you have the virtual in @world, and none of the packages that satisfy |
| 10 |
>> the virtual are in world, then portage is free to do whatever it deems |
| 11 |
>> correct to satisfy the virtual. This is what it did, and it is rather |
| 12 |
>> important you understand why this is so. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> If you have the virtual in world, and one of the packages that satisfy |
| 15 |
>> the virtual are in world, then portage will not uninstall that package |
| 16 |
>> and instead obey your instruction. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Ok, I'm getting there... |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I just confirmed that while I do have sys-fs/udev in world, but I *do* |
| 21 |
> have virtual/udev. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> So, based on what Samuli said about sys-fs/udev being the gentoo default |
| 24 |
> (where is this documented by the way?), seems the simplest thing to do |
| 25 |
> is add sys-fs/eudev to @world, but is this really the most appropriate |
| 26 |
> 'gentoo way'? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Or, maybe just remove virtual/udev from @world? Or both (add |
| 29 |
> sys-fs/eudev, remove virtual/udev)? |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Actually, since udev/eudev are more appropriately @system packages, |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
This is incorrect. @system is the minimal set of packages for a Gentoo |
| 35 |
system to work at all, and consists mostly of baselayout, toolchain and |
| 36 |
various packages used by the toolchain. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
A Gentoo system does NOT have to have a device manager to function, you |
| 39 |
can accomplish that easily with static device nodes. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
What is in @system is virtual/dev-manager which has this RDEPEND: |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
RDEPEND="|| ( |
| 44 |
virtual/udev |
| 45 |
sys-apps/busybox[mdev] |
| 46 |
sys-fs/devfsd |
| 47 |
sys-fs/static-dev |
| 48 |
sys-freebsd/freebsd-sbin |
| 49 |
)" |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
So you are free to install any of those methods you choose and thereby |
| 52 |
have working device nodes. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
To back up what Samuli said, if you want to GUARANTEE a certain device |
| 55 |
manager then you need to put it in @world, just like you already do for |
| 56 |
all the other packages you have. udev is in no way special in this regard. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> it |
| 60 |
> would make more sense to add them there - except @system is defined not |
| 61 |
> by a file but by the profile, and so would require a USE flag to define |
| 62 |
> this, but if I recall, adding a USE flag for this was decided against |
| 63 |
> (why I don't know)... |
| 64 |
> |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
-- |
| 68 |
Alan McKinnon |
| 69 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives