| 1 |
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> That's all true, hence my question. I'm not sure I want to use the very |
| 4 |
> first version so I thought it worth asking first. Since it is a fork, |
| 5 |
> one could think it would be safe enough but then again, it is the very |
| 6 |
> first one. It is stable according to that but is it really? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
But portage isn't telling you to use it. It's a decision you're taking |
| 10 |
in reaction to how your machine is configured, correct? I think the |
| 11 |
reason I'm not understanding even asking the question is that portage |
| 12 |
hasn't _told_ you that you need to use it. I may well be wrong but |
| 13 |
aren't you a stable user? Or are you running bleeding edge? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
It's likely to be 6 months and probably far longer before there's any |
| 16 |
push from portage to tell us switch to eudev, if ever. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I guess the other question that's lurking here for me is why do you |
| 19 |
have /usr on a separate partition? What's the usage model that drives |
| 20 |
a person to do that? The most I've ever done is move /usr/portage and |
| 21 |
/usr/src to other places. My /usr never has all that much in it beyond |
| 22 |
those two directories, along with maybe /usr/share. Would it not be |
| 23 |
easier for you in the long run to move /usr back to / and not have to |
| 24 |
deal with this question at all? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Just my 2 questioning cents, |
| 27 |
Mark |
Archives