| 1 |
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:07:00 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Not to mention the fact that this final/current seemingly complete |
| 4 |
> document was way, way too late for the many people who ended up with |
| 5 |
> totally broken systems, and *that* is what caused all of the 'hysteria |
| 6 |
> and mob-think' you so condescendingly speak of. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
This time the news was released before the update became available, |
| 9 |
although for something as potentially system-breaking as this, the gap |
| 10 |
should have been several days larger IMO. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> So, again, I would really, really like a very simple answer as to the |
| 13 |
> *best* way to retain the old way that is least likely to cause problems |
| 14 |
> down the road (ie, if/when udev is subsumed by systemd). Currently I |
| 15 |
> count 3 different ways |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The no.ifrename kernel option mentioned in the news item. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Or, as an alternative, *how* to switch to eudev (their web page does |
| 20 |
> *not* have simple/precise instructions on how to switch, only a |
| 21 |
> description of what it is) - ie, do I just emerge -C udev && emerge -C |
| 22 |
> virtual/udev && emerge eudev? Or is there more to it? |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
quickpkg udev && emerge -Ca udev && emerge -1a eudev |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Don't try removing virtual/udev, that is depended on by several packages |
| 27 |
(and probably system) but is satisfied by eudev. The only gotcha I found |
| 28 |
is that the USE flags for eudev must match those for eudev, so if you have |
| 29 |
anything udev-related in /etc/portage/package.use, make sure it applies |
| 30 |
to eudev too. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Did you hear about the blind prostitute? You have to hand it to her. |
Archives