From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 635FF1381F3 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:20:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4C9D4E0C76; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:20:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com (mail-wg0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB443E0AE2 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:19:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id e12so5502088wgh.9 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 05:19:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K5/79by+jqtniXlgDRllvMrJCkbAokfXTGkhJTsZ7Gg=; b=F3STjFQ20/yBCM7RpccPip4tHG6aEAG0YK/Bv5ayGcRd3PQIikt1VbUGimbx/x6jMi tDPg0aMFm34Dn24HcERqaD3Y72tZ5k9XvqjQYdMqcVOKB17J6OhFkcCoRF7fyZWBSX4J oczoEu+lVLojdFHKl+uNkjYJ9nn1/5Dkpk8YoCqId3brIGN1VltERRPM7n+IankP1SQx YQgIQIbU/pKH7lEPTM4mEqwiO+MpC3IGaQinN3xLNv/Laxk0+ALHwLplbW8no4caSJ32 N/YpwwvP0pBCdaKyHdBrdwFHdikyZsHp3WJT9Dfx95xtzUEMNMoufuf9NIUTKI28GGr0 aEiA== X-Received: by 10.194.176.74 with SMTP id cg10mr6585091wjc.75.1376309998645; Mon, 12 Aug 2013 05:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.20.205] (dustpuppy.is.co.za. [196.14.169.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ee5sm16052567wib.3.2013.08.12.05.19.57 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 12 Aug 2013 05:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5208D235.9090804@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:16:53 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130809 Thunderbird/17.0.8 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Moving from old udev to eudev References: <51FA8CB6.60000@libertytrek.org> <20130801194318.769d823d@digimed.co.uk> <51FFB59B.8010001@libertytrek.org> <20130805211838.2d2e2ef3@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <5205E470.60405@gentoo.org> <20130811053659.GA13037@waltdnes.org> <20130811110408.77c63e87@digimed.co.uk> <52079EDD.2000204@libertytrek.org> <20130811161504.5d3719d2@digimed.co.uk> <5207B33A.8020309@libertytrek.org> <20130811191354.72560822@digimed.co.uk> <5207DA41.7050804@gentoo.org> <5208B6CC.6070900@libertytrek.org> <5208BD73.7060909@gmail.com> <5208C8F9.5040205@libertytrek.org> In-Reply-To: <5208C8F9.5040205@libertytrek.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 979ff400-63f4-4534-9f76-c50a05ef8cad X-Archives-Hash: 370df1fe7ae19ceff42ebcc2f430b847 On 12/08/2013 13:37, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2013-08-12 6:48 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> On 12/08/2013 12:19, Tanstaafl wrote: >>> Hmmm... so is it eudev that would need to be updated to 'fix' this? Or >>> virtual/udev? Or both? > >> It has to do with how virtuals work. >> >> If you have the virtual in @world, and none of the packages that satisfy >> the virtual are in world, then portage is free to do whatever it deems >> correct to satisfy the virtual. This is what it did, and it is rather >> important you understand why this is so. >> >> If you have the virtual in world, and one of the packages that satisfy >> the virtual are in world, then portage will not uninstall that package >> and instead obey your instruction. > > Ok, I'm getting there... > > I just confirmed that while I do have sys-fs/udev in world, but I *do* > have virtual/udev. > > So, based on what Samuli said about sys-fs/udev being the gentoo default > (where is this documented by the way?), seems the simplest thing to do > is add sys-fs/eudev to @world, but is this really the most appropriate > 'gentoo way'? > > Or, maybe just remove virtual/udev from @world? Or both (add > sys-fs/eudev, remove virtual/udev)? > > Actually, since udev/eudev are more appropriately @system packages, This is incorrect. @system is the minimal set of packages for a Gentoo system to work at all, and consists mostly of baselayout, toolchain and various packages used by the toolchain. A Gentoo system does NOT have to have a device manager to function, you can accomplish that easily with static device nodes. What is in @system is virtual/dev-manager which has this RDEPEND: RDEPEND="|| ( virtual/udev sys-apps/busybox[mdev] sys-fs/devfsd sys-fs/static-dev sys-freebsd/freebsd-sbin )" So you are free to install any of those methods you choose and thereby have working device nodes. To back up what Samuli said, if you want to GUARANTEE a certain device manager then you need to put it in @world, just like you already do for all the other packages you have. udev is in no way special in this regard. > it > would make more sense to add them there - except @system is defined not > by a file but by the profile, and so would require a USE flag to define > this, but if I recall, adding a USE flag for this was decided against > (why I don't know)... > -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com