From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88880138330 for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 20:08:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A4E8621C198; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 20:08:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blaine.gmane.org (unknown [195.159.176.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04DE321C0FF for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2016 20:08:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bfYHt-0003LF-P0 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2016 22:08:37 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Kai Krakow Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: What's happened to gentoo-sources? Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 22:08:19 +0200 Message-ID: <20160901220819.7a1183df@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> References: <3719941.fjHdSEpZyq@peak> <3696924.CMMy0m93A0@peak> <20160830083455.739cc9a1@jupiter.sol.kaishome.de> <20160830084722.009963a1@digimed.co.uk> 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/kj9LlCTzutj58L0Ykd+./d."; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-Archives-Salt: c9adde05-5d19-413a-96d3-4e283b0602e2 X-Archives-Hash: 3e78fc23724b99ac9b08b0d33e1001d7 --Sig_/kj9LlCTzutj58L0Ykd+./d. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Tue, 30 Aug 2016 08:47:22 +0100 schrieb Neil Bothwick : > On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 08:34:55 +0200, Kai Krakow wrote: >=20 > > Surprise surprise, 4.7 has this (still not fully fixed) oom-killer > > bug. When I'm running virtual machines, it still kicks in. I wanted > > to stay on 4.6.x until 4.8 is released, and only then switch to > > 4.7. Now I was forced early (I'm using btrfs), and was instantly > > punished by doing so: =20 >=20 > No one forced you to do anything. You 4.6 kernel was still in boot, > your 4.6 sources were still installed. The ebuild was only removed > fro the portage tree, nothing was uninstalled from your system unless > you did it. Even the ebuild was still on your computer in /var/db/pkg. Of course nobody forced me. I just can't follow how the 4.7 ebuild kind-of replaced the 4.6 (and others) ebuild in face of this pretty mature oom-killer problem. Removal of a 4.6 series ebuild also means there would follow no updates - so my next upgrade would "force" me into deciding going way down (probably a bad idea) or up into unknown territory (and this showed: can also be a problem). Or I can stay with 4.6 until depclean removed it for good (which will, by the way, remove the files from /usr/src). I think masking had been a much more fair option, especially because portage has means of displaying me the reasoning behind masking it. In the end, I simply was really unprepared for this - and this is usually not how Gentoo works and always worked for me. I'm used to Gentoo doing better. Even if the 4.6 series were keyworded - in case of kernel packages they should not be removed without masking first. I think a lot of people like to stay - at least temporary - close to kernel mainline because they want to use the one or other feature. And then my workflow is always like this: If an ebuild is removed, it's time to also remove it from my installation and replace it with another version or an alternative. I usually do this during the masking phase. --=20 Regards, Kai Replies to list-only preferred. --Sig_/kj9LlCTzutj58L0Ykd+./d. Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale Signatur von OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlfIirMACgkQ+D7cQ/kIzAXBRgCfcBehAMuKfDaCEoClEPhsNEd6 p4YAn1JIO/L2xCnFFFPge3PKsg07MnAq =vI2y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/kj9LlCTzutj58L0Ykd+./d.--