From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QaPYW-0003Fh-Bn for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:53:36 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 60BBE1C015; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.muc.de (colin.muc.de [193.149.48.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4AC1C015 for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:52:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 22480 invoked by uid 3782); 25 Jun 2011 09:52:01 -0000 Received: from acm.muc.de (pD951B17E.dip.t-dialin.net [217.81.177.126]) by colin2.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 11:52:00 +0200 Received: (qmail 3159 invoked by uid 1000); 25 Jun 2011 09:50:15 -0000 Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 09:50:15 +0000 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] no keyboard no mouse Message-ID: <20110625095015.GA2850@acm.acm> References: <1308905235.4e044f1384787@imp.free.fr> <20110624144224.GC7217@acm.acm> <6358552.mjGuFfGUtd@nazgul> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6358552.mjGuFfGUtd@nazgul> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.5 (Fettercairn) From: Alan Mackenzie X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 1406f01fcc415a1d3f046ee27456e70d Hi, Alan. On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 04:57:05PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > Hmm. Recompiling the same source code produces a different binary? > Not quite: > Rebuilding the same sources against different headers produces a > different binary. > > Presumably, it uses C macros in a .h file which is part of xorg. Or > > something like that. > > So evdev depends on xorg. Isn't there a way of expressing this in > > evdev's ebuild? Something like the DEPEND variable? > It's already there, but doesn't help as the update trigger never > happens. > Actually, you have the depend the wrong way round - evdev depends on > xorg-server; to have the driver and for it to be useful, the xorg- > server must be present, otherwise there is nothing for the drivers to > build against. > You want to force a rebuild that is the opposite of the DEPEND, but > portage does not support that (it's a circular dependency). It will > also not rebuild the driver as part of a regular update as there is not > a new version of the driver, hence according to normal portage logic > there is no need to do so. > Make sense? I think so - I've always had problems understanding dependencies. What I want is one of these "nice to have"s which would take an inordinate amount of work, if it's even possible. In the meantime, I'll carry on not starting Gnome at boot-up. Despite the existence of gentoo=nox, I feel safer starting it manually. It's a strange, depressing feeling when the only input device which works is the reset button - thank goodness that isn't handled by evdev. ;-) > -- > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).