[gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tanstaafl]

Is this right?

 >  # eix udev
 > ...
> [U] sys-fs/udev
>      Available versions:  208-r1^t 212-r1^t ~213^t **9999^t {acl doc +firmware-loader gudev introspection +kmod selinux static-libs ABI_MIPS="n32 n64 o32" ABI_X86="32 64 x32"}
>      Installed versions:  208^t{tbz2}(03:30:13 PM 12/08/2013)(acl firmware-loader kmod openrc -doc -gudev -introspection -selinux -static-libs ABI_MIPS="-n32 -n64 -o32" ABI_X86="64 -32 -x32")
>      Homepage:            http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd
>      Description:         Linux dynamic and persistent device naming support (aka userspace devfs)
...

Installed version shows the openrc USE flag, new version doesn't.

And more importantly:

>  # emerge -pvuDN udev
>
> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild     U  ] sys-apps/kmod-17 [16] USE="tools zlib -debug -doc -lzma -python% -static-libs (-openrc%*)" PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7%* python3_3%* -python3_2% (-python3_4)" 1,450 kB
> [ebuild     U  ] sys-fs/udev-212-r1 [208] USE="acl firmware-loader kmod -doc -gudev -introspection (-selinux) -static-libs (-openrc%*)" ABI_X86="(64) (-32) (-x32)" 2,660 kB
> [ebuild  N     ] virtual/libudev-208:0/1  USE="-static-libs" ABI_X86="(64) (-32) (-x32)" 0 kB
> [ebuild     U  ] virtual/udev-208-r2 [208-r1] USE="-gudev -introspection -static-libs (-kmod%*) (-selinux%)" ABI_X86="(64) (-32) (-x32)" 0 kB
> [ebuild     U  ] sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-26-r2 [26] 0 kB
>
> Total: 5 packages (4 upgrades, 1 new), Size of downloads: 4,110 kB

This clearly shows the -openrc USE flag being applied.

Googling didn't reveal an answer...

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 14/06/2014 15:30, Tanstaafl wrote:
> Is this right?
> 
>>  # eix udev
>> ...
>> [U] sys-fs/udev
>>      Available versions:  208-r1^t 212-r1^t ~213^t **9999^t {acl doc
>> +firmware-loader gudev introspection +kmod selinux static-libs
>> ABI_MIPS="n32 n64 o32" ABI_X86="32 64 x32"}
>>      Installed versions:  208^t{tbz2}(03:30:13 PM 12/08/2013)(acl
>> firmware-loader kmod openrc -doc -gudev -introspection -selinux
>> -static-libs ABI_MIPS="-n32 -n64 -o32" ABI_X86="64 -32 -x32")
>>      Homepage:           
>> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd
>>      Description:         Linux dynamic and persistent device naming
>> support (aka userspace devfs)
> ...
> 
> Installed version shows the openrc USE flag, new version doesn't.
> 
> And more importantly:
> 
>>  # emerge -pvuDN udev
>>
>> These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
>>
>> Calculating dependencies... done!
>> [ebuild     U  ] sys-apps/kmod-17 [16] USE="tools zlib -debug -doc
>> -lzma -python% -static-libs (-openrc%*)" PYTHON_TARGETS="python2_7%*
>> python3_3%* -python3_2% (-python3_4)" 1,450 kB
>> [ebuild     U  ] sys-fs/udev-212-r1 [208] USE="acl firmware-loader
>> kmod -doc -gudev -introspection (-selinux) -static-libs (-openrc%*)"
>> ABI_X86="(64) (-32) (-x32)" 2,660 kB
>> [ebuild  N     ] virtual/libudev-208:0/1  USE="-static-libs"
>> ABI_X86="(64) (-32) (-x32)" 0 kB
>> [ebuild     U  ] virtual/udev-208-r2 [208-r1] USE="-gudev
>> -introspection -static-libs (-kmod%*) (-selinux%)" ABI_X86="(64) (-32)
>> (-x32)" 0 kB
>> [ebuild     U  ] sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-26-r2 [26] 0 kB
>>
>> Total: 5 packages (4 upgrades, 1 new), Size of downloads: 4,110 kB
> 
> This clearly shows the -openrc USE flag being applied.

You read it wrong. The USE flag is not being applied it's being removed
(the minus "-"), and the reason it is being removed is that it doesn't
exist for the new ebuild. That's what the parenthesis means.

> 
> Googling didn't reveal an answer...

It's in the emerge man page. If not there, is one of the man pages from
portage



> 
> 
> 


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tanstaafl]

Thanks Alan, but...

On 6/14/2014 10:16 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/06/2014 15:30, Tanstaafl wrote:
>> This clearly shows the -openrc USE flag being applied.
>
> You read it wrong. The USE flag is not being applied it's being removed
> (the minus "-"),

Well, I did include the hyphen(-), so I meant in the negative (removed) 
sense.

> and the reason it is being removed is that it doesn't exist for the
> new ebuild. That's what the parenthesis means.

Ah... ok, I'd forgotten about the significance of the ()...

But...

>> Googling didn't reveal an answer...
>
> It's in the emerge man page. If not there, is one of the man pages from
> portage

Ok, that explains the meaning of the (), but doesn't explain this 
*change* satisfactorily (to a non-coder at least)...

*Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed previously?

Since udev (and openrc vs systemd) is such a huge topic lately, I think 
this should be clearly explained, possibly even warranting a news item.

I still, even after your answer, don't really understand why and whether 
or not this is 'normal', or going to bite me later big time.

Thanks again, I'd like to do this upgrade this weekend, but I don't 
upgrade system critical packages without fully understanding changes 
like this.

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> Ok, that explains the meaning of the (), but doesn't explain this *change*
> satisfactorily (to a non-coder at least)...
>
> *Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed previously?
>

Read the ChangeLog for sys-fs/udev, specifically the entry on 03 Apr 2014.

> Since udev (and openrc vs systemd) is such a huge topic lately, I think this
> should be clearly explained, possibly even warranting a news item.
>

We don't need news items for every little change to
udev/openrc/systemd, especially when no action is required.

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tanstaafl]

On 6/14/2014 1:02 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
>> *Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed previously?

> Read the ChangeLog for sys-fs/udev, specifically the entry on 03 Apr 2014.

Thanks - a half hour of googling didn't find this.

>> Since udev (and openrc vs systemd) is such a huge topic lately, I think this
>> should be clearly explained, possibly even warranting a news item.

> We don't need news items for every little change to
> udev/openrc/systemd, especially when no action is required.

Still, for those of us who actually look at what is about to happen, and 
notice a change like this that could potentially cause boot problems 
(udev+openrc), it would be nice.

Anyway, thanks for the pointer, I understand it now and have already 
upgraded udev...

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> Still, for those of us who actually look at what is about to happen, and
> notice a change like this that could potentially cause boot problems
> (udev+openrc), it would be nice.

I think it makes more sense to limit news items to situations that
actually require the user to make a decision or take some action.

If we start publishing news items saying "everything is ok, you don't
have to do anything" every time some aspect of udev changes, people
will stop reading them, and we will run into the same situation we
have with pkg_postinst spam.

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tom H]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> On 6/14/2014 1:02 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> *Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed previously?
>>
>> Read the ChangeLog for sys-fs/udev, specifically the entry on 03 Apr 2014.
>
> Thanks - a half hour of googling didn't find this.

03 Apr 2014; Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>
udev-212-r1.ebuild, udev-9999.ebuild:
Punt USE="openrc" and always pull in sys-fs/udev-init-scripts to match
behavior of sys-apps/systemd's ebuild.

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tanstaafl]

On 6/14/2014 2:15 PM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
>> On 6/14/2014 1:02 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> *Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed previously?
>>>
>>> Read the ChangeLog for sys-fs/udev, specifically the entry on 03 Apr 2014.
>>
>> Thanks - a half hour of googling didn't find this.

> 03 Apr 2014; Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>
> udev-212-r1.ebuild, udev-9999.ebuild:
> Punt USE="openrc" and always pull in sys-fs/udev-init-scripts to match
> behavior of sys-apps/systemd's ebuild.

Which means... what exactly?

The only way I can make sense of your reply is...

It means the only purpose of the openrc USE flag prio to this change was 
to pull in udev-init-scripts?

See what I mean? How am I supposed to know that?

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Alon Bar-Lev]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> On 6/14/2014 2:15 PM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6/14/2014 1:02 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed
>>>>> previously?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read the ChangeLog for sys-fs/udev, specifically the entry on 03 Apr
>>>> 2014.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks - a half hour of googling didn't find this.
>
>
>> 03 Apr 2014; Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>
>> udev-212-r1.ebuild, udev-9999.ebuild:
>> Punt USE="openrc" and always pull in sys-fs/udev-init-scripts to match
>> behavior of sys-apps/systemd's ebuild.
>
>
> Which means... what exactly?
>
> The only way I can make sense of your reply is...
>
> It means the only purpose of the openrc USE flag prio to this change was to
> pull in udev-init-scripts?
>
> See what I mean? How am I supposed to know that?
>

It means that openrc users should strongly consider migrate to eudev.
I use eudev since its beta and never had any issue, nor systemd
leaking into my system. And in addition add the following at
make.conf, as it seems that we are enforced to have files we never
use.

INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd /lib32/systemd /lib64/systemd
/usr/lib/systemd /usr/lib32/systemd /usr/lib64/systemd /etc/systemd"

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl@gentoo.org> wrote:
> And in addition add the following at
> make.conf, as it seems that we are enforced to have files we never
> use.

Hate to break the news to you, but by your definition you're
"enforced" to have thousands of files you never use on your system.
How many man pages do you actually use?  How many packages in
/usr/portage do you use?

The systemd units are there so that if you ever do switch to systemd
you don't have to rebuild your entire system to get them.  Ditto for
the files in /etc/init.d.  If you don't like them you can mask them -
that's what that feature is for...

Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Alon Bar-Lev]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> And in addition add the following at
>> make.conf, as it seems that we are enforced to have files we never
>> use.
>
> Hate to break the news to you, but by your definition you're
> "enforced" to have thousands of files you never use on your system.
> How many man pages do you actually use?  How many packages in
> /usr/portage do you use?
>
> The systemd units are there so that if you ever do switch to systemd
> you don't have to rebuild your entire system to get them.  Ditto for
> the files in /etc/init.d.  If you don't like them you can mask them -
> that's what that feature is for...
>
> Rich
>

I still think that my definition is correct, there should have been
openrc profile and systemd profile, the effort your are trying to push
including for your-self of simple migration into systemd is agenda
that I would have liked see kept away from people who chose not to be
effected by these efforts. Until now we had no files just there
because of kde<->gnome migration or any other future migration people
may want.

I had never needed to use the mask until the systemd files was
enforced without having a profile nor USE. The correct approach would
have to add openrc USE and not remove the systemd USE.

But all is history now, for now we are left with using eudev +
manually mask anything of systemd as these are irrelevant + forcing
/usr and initramfs etc...

Regards,
Alon

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Joseph]

On 06/14/14 23:39, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
[snip]
>
>It means that openrc users should strongly consider migrate to eudev.
>I use eudev since its beta and never had any issue, nor systemd
>leaking into my system. And in addition add the following at
>make.conf, as it seems that we are enforced to have files we never
>use.
>
>INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd /lib32/systemd /lib64/systemd
>/usr/lib/systemd /usr/lib32/systemd /usr/lib64/systemd /etc/systemd"

How "sys-fs/eudev" differes from the one we are using "sys-fs/udev"

-- 
Joseph

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Alon Bar-Lev]

On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 5:15 AM, Joseph <syscon780@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/14/14 23:39, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> [snip]
>
>>
>> It means that openrc users should strongly consider migrate to eudev.
>> I use eudev since its beta and never had any issue, nor systemd
>> leaking into my system. And in addition add the following at
>> make.conf, as it seems that we are enforced to have files we never
>> use.
>>
>> INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd /lib32/systemd /lib64/systemd
>> /usr/lib/systemd /usr/lib32/systemd /usr/lib64/systemd /etc/systemd"
>
>
> How "sys-fs/eudev" differes from the one we are using "sys-fs/udev"

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/81901

>
> --
> Joseph
>

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <alonbl@gentoo.org> wrote:
> INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd /lib32/systemd /lib64/systemd
> /usr/lib/systemd /usr/lib32/systemd /usr/lib64/systemd /etc/systemd"
>

Warning to the reader: Please do not copy/paste this particular
INSTALL_MASK setting. It may work with sys-fs/eudev, but it is quite
likely to break your system if you are using sys-fs/udev.

As well, the lib32 and lib64 entries should be unnecessary;
systemd-related files are only installed in /lib/systemd and
/usr/lib/systemd. Any package which installs them in lib32 or lib64 is
doing it wrong and should be fixed. Bug reports are welcome.

If you just want to exclude unit files, a much safer setting is this:

INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd/system /usr/lib/systemd/system"

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tom H]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> wrote:
> On 6/14/2014 2:15 PM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>> wrote:
>>> On 6/14/2014 1:02 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> *Why* was it removed/no longer needed? And why was it needed
>>>>> previously?
>>>>
>>>> Read the ChangeLog for sys-fs/udev, specifically the entry on 03 Apr
>>>> 2014.
>>>
>>> Thanks - a half hour of googling didn't find this.
>>
>> 03 Apr 2014; Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>
>> udev-212-r1.ebuild, udev-9999.ebuild:
>> Punt USE="openrc" and always pull in sys-fs/udev-init-scripts to match
>> behavior of sys-apps/systemd's ebuild.
>
> Which means... what exactly?
>
> The only way I can make sense of your reply is...
>
> It means the only purpose of the openrc USE flag prio to this change was to
> pull in udev-init-scripts?
>
> See what I mean? How am I supposed to know that?

By looking at the ebuild changes.

For sysfs/udev, "+openrc" was removed from IUSE and
"sys-fs/udev-init-scripts" no longer pdepends on the openrc USE flag.

sys-apps/kmod also has "(-openrc%*)" in your output so there must be
something similar at work there.

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 14/06/2014 16:31, Tanstaafl wrote:
> Thanks Alan, but...
> 
> On 6/14/2014 10:16 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 14/06/2014 15:30, Tanstaafl wrote:
>>> This clearly shows the -openrc USE flag being applied.
>>
>> You read it wrong. The USE flag is not being applied it's being removed
>> (the minus "-"),
> 
> Well, I did include the hyphen(-), so I meant in the negative (removed)
> sense.
> 
>> and the reason it is being removed is that it doesn't exist for the
>> new ebuild. That's what the parenthesis means.
> 
> Ah... ok, I'd forgotten about the significance of the ()...
> 
> But...
> 
>>> Googling didn't reveal an answer...
>>
>> It's in the emerge man page. If not there, is one of the man pages from
>> portage
> 
> Ok, that explains the meaning of the (), but doesn't explain this
> *change* satisfactorily (to a non-coder at least)...


This has already been answered by others, but to summarize:

The reason it is not obvious is that the answer is not in the output,
the output only gives a summary of what is to be done.

The answer is *always" in the ebuild and Changelog.
Sometimes it's on Google too, but that is unreliable.



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The answer is *always" in the ebuild and Changelog.
> Sometimes it's on Google too, but that is unreliable.
>

In general the stance is supposed to be that if it doesn't have a news
item, it shouldn't be a high-impact change.

Now, I realize that broke down a bit recently and there is always a
diversity of opinions on what does and doesn't need news.  However, in
general I wouldn't be too paranoid about things breaking/etc.

That said, I generally don't update system packages on a day when I'm
not going to have time to deal with any issues, and that is good
practice.  For something of particular concern I might just wait a day
or two and see if there is any list or forum traffic.

Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Tanstaafl]

On 6/14/2014 7:08 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> The answer is *always" in the ebuild and Changelog.

I agree that, now that I know what and why, that it didn't rate a news 
item, but - especially with respect to anything related to the touchy 
subject of systemd/openrc - some kind of informational text explaining 
the change in the postinst text of the installation (I always read these 
emails when performing updates, even for non critical packages) is 
warranted (imnsho)...

Re: [gentoo-user] udev upgrade 208 > 212-r1, openrc USE flag changed to disabled?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 15/06/2014 16:48, Tanstaafl wrote:
> On 6/14/2014 7:08 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The answer is *always" in the ebuild and Changelog.
> 
> I agree that, now that I know what and why, that it didn't rate a news
> item, but - especially with respect to anything related to the touchy
> subject of systemd/openrc - some kind of informational text explaining
> the change in the postinst text of the installation (I always read these
> emails when performing updates, even for non critical packages) is
> warranted (imnsho)...
> 
> 
> 


You used the word "touchy", and that is the lynch factor here.

People are touchy about systemd, making the entire thing a
political/social argument and not a technical one. The tree is a 100%
technical creation and social/political factors do not feature.

Nothing broke and you were not required to make a decision. Hence no
news needed.



-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com