[gentoo-user] nvidia-drivers 325.15 removal

[gentoo-user] nvidia-drivers 325.15 removal

[»Q«]

It looks to me as if the removal of nvidia-drivers-325.15 was a
mistake, but I've got a lot going on in the meat world right now, and I
don't want to file a bug if I've simply gotten confused.

I run mostly stable amd64.  I have 325.15 installed, and nothing
regarding nvidia-drivers in /etc/portage/package/accept_keywords, so I
*think* 325.15 was the latest stable and shouldn't have been removed
for being old.  The removal makes portage want to downgrade the package
for me.

I see in the changelog:

  14 Dec 2013; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> -nvidia-drivers-325.15.ebuild:
  Old.

  [...]

  02 Nov 2013; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> -nvidia-drivers-325.08.ebuild,
  nvidia-drivers-325.15.ebuild:
  Stable for AMD64 x86 too.

Could someone confirm or set me straight?

Re: [gentoo-user] nvidia-drivers 325.15 removal

[Philip Webb]

131214 »Q« wrote:
> It looks to me as if the removal of nvidia-drivers-325.15 was a mistake
> I run mostly stable amd64.
> I *think* 325.15 was the latest stable

  [I] x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers
     Available versions:  96.43.23^msd 173.14.39^msd 304.116^msd ~304.117^msd 319.76^msd 331.20^msd {+X acpi custom-cflags gtk multilib pax_kernel (+)tools KERNEL="FreeBSD linux"}
     Installed versions:  331.20^msd([2013-11-23 15:26:19])(X multilib -acpi -pax_kernel -tools KERNEL="linux -FreeBSD")

No problems here.  Have you sync'ed recently ?

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

[gentoo-user] Re: nvidia-drivers 325.15 removal

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 15/12/13 06:39, »Q« wrote:
> It looks to me as if the removal of nvidia-drivers-325.15 was a
> mistake, but I've got a lot going on in the meat world right now, and I
> don't want to file a bug if I've simply gotten confused.
>
> I run mostly stable amd64.  I have 325.15 installed, and nothing
> regarding nvidia-drivers in /etc/portage/package/accept_keywords, so I
> *think* 325.15 was the latest stable and shouldn't have been removed
> for being old.  The removal makes portage want to downgrade the package
> for me.
>
> I see in the changelog:
>
>    14 Dec 2013; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> -nvidia-drivers-325.15.ebuild:
>    Old.
>
>    [...]
>
>    02 Nov 2013; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> -nvidia-drivers-325.08.ebuild,
>    nvidia-drivers-325.15.ebuild:
>    Stable for AMD64 x86 too.
>
> Could someone confirm or set me straight?

I confirm. The latest unmasked version is 319.76 (I'm using that one.) 
331.20 is also in portage (latest upstream stable), but it's masked in 
portage. Usually, if you try to explicitly emerge something that's 
masked, you get a message telling you why it's masked:

   $ emerge -p =x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20
   ...
   [ebuild     U #] x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 [319.76]

   The following mask changes are necessary to proceed:
    (see "package.unmask" in the portage(5) man page for more details)
   # required by =x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 (argument)
   # /usr/portage/profiles/targets/desktop/kde/package.mask:
   # Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@gentoo.org> (1 Dec 2013)
   # Mask recent nvidia drivers because of sigprocmask corruption, bug 
487558
   # (this hits akonadi and makes significant parts of KDE hang)
   =x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20

So it was masked due to conflicts with KDE. If you're not using KDE, it 
might be safe to unmask it.

[gentoo-user] Re: nvidia-drivers 325.15 removal

[»Q«]

On Sun, 15 Dec 2013 14:24:58 +0200
Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 15/12/13 06:39, »Q« wrote:
> > It looks to me as if the removal of nvidia-drivers-325.15 was a
> > mistake, but I've got a lot going on in the meat world right now,
> > and I don't want to file a bug if I've simply gotten confused.
> >
> > I run mostly stable amd64.  I have 325.15 installed, and nothing
> > regarding nvidia-drivers in /etc/portage/package/accept_keywords,
> > so I *think* 325.15 was the latest stable and shouldn't have been
> > removed for being old.  The removal makes portage want to downgrade
> > the package for me.
> >
> > I see in the changelog:
> >
> >    14 Dec 2013; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org>
> > -nvidia-drivers-325.15.ebuild: Old.
> >
> >    [...]
> >
> >    02 Nov 2013; Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org>
> > -nvidia-drivers-325.08.ebuild, nvidia-drivers-325.15.ebuild:
> >    Stable for AMD64 x86 too.
> >
> > Could someone confirm or set me straight?
> 
> I confirm. The latest unmasked version is 319.76 (I'm using that
> one.) 331.20 is also in portage (latest upstream stable), but it's
> masked in portage. Usually, if you try to explicitly emerge something
> that's masked, you get a message telling you why it's masked:
> 
>    $ emerge -p =x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20
>    ...
>    [ebuild     U #] x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 [319.76]
> 
>    The following mask changes are necessary to proceed:
>     (see "package.unmask" in the portage(5) man page for more details)
>    # required by =x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20 (argument)
>    # /usr/portage/profiles/targets/desktop/kde/package.mask:
>    # Andreas K. Huettel <dilfridge@gentoo.org> (1 Dec 2013)
>    # Mask recent nvidia drivers because of sigprocmask corruption,
> bug 487558
>    # (this hits akonadi and makes significant parts of KDE hang)
>    =x11-drivers/nvidia-drivers-331.20
> 
> So it was masked due to conflicts with KDE. If you're not using KDE,
> it might be safe to unmask it.

I was using 331.20, but I do use KDE and it was causing me those hangs.
At the time 331.20 was masked, I switched to 325.15.  Now that 325.15
has been removed from the tree, the latest stable is 319.19, and
that's what portage wants to downgrade me to as of yesterday.

I guess my question boils down to:  Was 325.15 ever stabilized?  

If it was stabilized, it shouldn't have been removed simply due oldness.

If it was *not* stabilized, the only issue is between my ears.