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 B4868138CBF for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:07:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 158A8E0AE7; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:07:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com (mail-qc0-f169.google.com [209.85.216.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0854E08FB for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 21:07:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qcyi15 with SMTP id i15so21570228qcy.0 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:07:31 -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=Jla59T+AKk6xBsEsEplZFaxozIvf75djRdivJGXEhaU=; b=xKbLU+O+Q+2UpMbkYb9HYfzAonGwU0ItzVTeUtWBcTVT3lB5LsqMSzeliX8RwzQW4L QO55HxNR3UK32qHXPI5cuesZlGCcTP2plAKzcRBJ80rDX/20EYRnOzagOSgWeYCa2nir /NJKv1WRUejBAOMIDRhUbDZjavKSf9k6H3ScSHMtLESrtHCioIv7oqKvIPA23lyCUm+S O88UEHdioqc3H41tLdx2LkdFnq0ly/F6Zv5ZY3njTbs4B9QEQn8ob/elmmZaIVZMyrsO c/hPPMJxRROL8jj2Xot8i2a8sS4DaqQhOKF9peQ2sOivQ2sBTHHVJ/inRfQ+wp9Zjn1t HOeQ== X-Received: by 10.140.98.2 with SMTP id n2mr48985195qge.62.1426626451167; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-117-248.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.117.248]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 184sm10399050qhc.39.2015.03.17.14.07.30 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:07:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55089791.5080603@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:07:29 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/36.0 SeaMonkey/2.33 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] eject and util-linux blocker References: <5506E3E8.8070008@gmail.com> <20150316153411.GA20837@waltdnes.org> <550786D0.2080602@gmail.com> <5507E27D.4050603@gmail.com> <55085E03.2090001@gmail.com> <550864C8.6000400@gmail.com> <55086E0B.5080703@gmail.com> <55088B86.70906@gmail.com> <55088F2D.5080708@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55088F2D.5080708@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 69aa2c18-69a2-4241-898c-3032ed8d8028 X-Archives-Hash: bcc24d529380574ad8c3fc74b3d2f933 Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 17/03/2015 22:16, Dale wrote: >> Mike Gilbert wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Dale wrote: >>>> Alan McKinnon wrote: >>>>> Your basic problem is that you have static and static-libs in USE. = When >>>>> applied to lvm, a whole bunch of blockers kick in and you get what = you >>>>> got. So take them out of USE. >>>>> >>>>> USE=3D"static static-libs" has it's uses, it's great for building r= escue >>>>> disks, busybox and maybe some disk repair utils, but makes very lit= tle >>>>> sense on a regular workstation. If you break your workstation, you'= ll >>>>> boot off a rescue disk and use the tools on it to fix your install,= so >>>>> you don't need it on the main system. >>>>> >>>>> There is nothing wrong with your eudev. >>>>> lvm2 is bitching about blockers between lvm2 built with "USE=3Dstat= ic" and >>>>> udev - there's some incompatibility there and the ebuild knows abou= t them >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I went through the package.use file and commented out the static and= >>>> static-libs stuff. It seems happy but thing is, when I put them the= re, >>>> they were needed for some reason. Actually, all the parts I found h= ad >>>> the output of where emerge said those were needed. Maybe the reason= >>>> they were needed then has changed and they are no longer needed. I = hope >>>> anyway. ;-) >>> I know there were some guides for doing LVM root that used to advise >>> building stuff statically, probably because of some problem with >>> genkernel. >>> >>> With a modern initramfs (dracut, and possible recent genkernel), >>> shared libs work just as well, so there should be no need. >>> >>> >> Well, in package.use, it has some output of emerge that said it needed= =2E=20 >> Here is a snippet: >> >> # required by sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.109[static] >> # required by @selected >> # required by @world (argument) >> #=3Dsys-apps/util-linux-2.24.1-r3 static-libs > > You are reading it wrong. That means: > util-linux needs to be built with USE=3D"static-libs" > because > lvm2 is already built with USE=3D"static" > > None of which explains why you originally built lvm2 that way. It was because emerge told me it needed it for some reason. It is very rare that I just put something in package.use on my own. On the rare times I have done it, it is on a package that I use and I need to enable something but don't want to enable it globally or only that one package has that USE flag. A couple examples, gimp, nut, gtkam is a few that I have in there because of some option I need to enable/disable.=20 >> # required by virtual/udev-208-r2 >> # required by @selected >> # required by @world (argument) >> #virtual/libudev static-libs >> >> # required by virtual/udev-208-r2[gudev] >> # required by @selected >> # required by @world (argument) >> #virtual/libgudev static-libs >> >> There's a couple more but you get the idea. I don't use genkernel, >> tried it but never got a working kernel from it so I do them by hand. = >> Everything built OK with no more complaining so I guess whatever it is= >> has changed. Still weird tho.=20 > > This has nothing to do with genkernel. > More than likely, you followed some daft advice on teh intarwebz saying= > you need a static lvm to be able to boot / on lvm. > > I don't have / on lvm. /boot and / are on regular partitions.=20 Everything else, /usr, /var and /home, are on lvm. Keep in mind, I was trying to avoid that init thingy.=20 I mentioned genkernel because Mike mentioned it. I tried it ages ago and never got a kernel that would boot. I don't even have it installed here. I started doing them by hand and have been pretty good at it ever since. Odd I know.=20 Dale :-) :-)=20