From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-140526-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2184B1381F4
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:24:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 27049E06BF;
Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:24:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yw0-f53.google.com (mail-yw0-f53.google.com [209.85.213.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71EE1E052E
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:21:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by yhp3 with SMTP id 3so2861845yhp.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:21:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=ZpuZxLp4bfV+4XeJxMUE23MSoVII9ClmGgRzUT/qIAU=;
b=s5jkRC2Fwg+6ZAP0i0H23C9v9TQ0Z2sqNJ4u/1yVDYYSqWDvl/wvm5XKRyB41MaI/7
O2P4Aw4AYME9S2PvyJkQKGWdTnMbNmOj/e9RPpyW9tsYSo5VR/DGItXxErukBaZd8CFd
61qaaeXV/9hT0b7iIUJgJA6+K36oMiHuOsjT1cMUADNId80YpzBAMbvZaT/IPZpifVqR
o+1EDGbC8WdQDZV4QjFreged8N7n81B/+5WuGLe0xBcaf6+HmHGDh86eFm9NlLfkY970
F499JfJOieoG03MFqJPxsALdzUyQ2BUste9vNQqKdL79IirTWCJg/OjZs66UcUc/Ozqo
R/iw==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.236.147.5 with SMTP id s5mr8527270yhj.87.1344795709960; Sun,
12 Aug 2012 11:21:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.100.194.7 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:21:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <yu9a9y0atoo.fsf@nyu.edu>
References: <yu9a9y0atoo.fsf@nyu.edu>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 13:21:49 -0500
Message-ID: <CADPrc82G_y0tEmOB9tVerZdF1wm3Hvib2jdtEAnAGVdcdxphBA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] udev-181 saga continues with udisks (~amd64)
From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= <caneko@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 83d74b1a-0a92-4026-ae8a-46b6658f6040
X-Archives-Hash: d6303dbd78b9e29df1e82914ab99ba8c
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Allan Gottlieb <gottlieb@nyu.edu> wrote:
> I have been masking udev-181 so that I can continue to keep my current
> system with / and /usr separate partitions.
>
> This has required masking pciutils and usbutils as well.
> /etc/portage/package.mask/udev-181 contains
> >=3Dsys-fs/udev-181
> >=3Dsys-apps/pciutils-3.1.9-r2
> >=3Dsys-apps/usbutils-005-r1
>
> Now udisks-1.99.0-r1 wants to pull in a new package udev-init-scripts.
> I currently have udisks-1.98.0 which is fine.
>
> I added
> >=3Dsys-fs/udisks-1.99.0
> to package.mask/udev-181 and emerge --pretend --update world reports no
> conflicts.
>
> I was about to proceed when I looked at eix udisks and noticed that
> 1. "my" udisk -1.98.0 is no longer there
> 2. The 1-99.0-r1 is now in slot 2 and new 1.0.4-r[23] are in slot 0.
> I looked at -r3 and it wants >=3Dudev-171-r5. Since I have -r6 my sys=
.
> should meet the requirement.
>
> So I wonder if my mask >=3Dsys-fs/udisks-1.99.0 is a bad idea and I shoul=
d
> instead be forcing/encouraging udisks-1.0.4-r3 (and, if so, how?).
Not a bad idea per se, but you do realize that you cannoy keep masking
some stuff and upgrading the rest, right? If you are happy with udisks
1.98, get the ebuild /var/db/pkg/sys-fs/udisk-1.98.0 (if still there),
and keep it in a personal overlay. The same with all the stuff you
need for not upgrading udev.
But anyway, this will only work for some time; at some point, it is
possible (and highly probable) that something you need will require
udisks-1.99, or another package that itself requires a newer version
of udev. The only way to avoid the upgrade is to left everything as it
is (don't upgrade), or trying something like Walt's mdev setup:
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev
Of course, not every software will work with that, contrary to udev.
If you want to force an old version of udev, you will (eventually)
force an old version of everything that depends directly or indirectly
on udev. There is no way around that.
I believe (for reading your posts into the list) that you really don't
want an initramfs, or at least dracut. I would give it a try; I'm
pretty sure is easier than juggling package masks.
Regards.
--=20
Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingenier=C3=ADa de la Computaci=C3=B3n
Universidad Nacional Aut=C3=B3noma de M=C3=A9xico