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 244791381F3 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:40:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E111721C051; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:39:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f181.google.com (mail-qc0-f181.google.com [209.85.216.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2B7521C030 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:38:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f181.google.com with SMTP id x40so4289675qcp.40 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:38:40 -0800 (PST) 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; bh=T0irjNflJOPQSqmCNoMR4w3BSGBT+aUF+qpDJp71ulw=; b=f1FVwQhF5PLnhyO2HwOE0acbHiuU/ARM5Il3hAoh7UQZDoOSwDRKVjYJsLm6FfhFNR JMxzbOoq+v+HHj2FpGSYezmtOzLnk2ucOA/1t1ZoQ5+g2W24nl9x9kT1tbQsiYXFrRrf 2f6PTsLs4HReII01uzpEPSA9MiVcx/GLyas0JymaNcHlu2+DV9MrrWR+cWZXqqxuVL0T fnfv0SOAeNBQcp7VrGz3gKLdG7xoMAEB3ZGV1k1zM45ocmoUqdkB8VtbZYasl8KCNB0J wfY+HEeaX1zfcBgGOEg40Vq/rVj+9C0vd+aeMnypS8veuws3Hub/AIpM3IDTqJtgnm+T WrXg== 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 Received: by 10.49.82.113 with SMTP id h17mr18243335qey.24.1353440320776; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:38:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.186.132 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:38:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50AB89D3.40508@libertytrek.org> References: <50AB89D3.40508@libertytrek.org> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 11:38:40 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRC update to 0.11.5 - safe if using older udev (pinned to udev-181)? From: Mark Knecht To: Gentoo User Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 30f50488-d2ab-47fa-8303-58374837e0a7 X-Archives-Hash: c6c3e6adec1c4c006912256d21e4408c On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: > Anyone? > > I don't see any news blurbs warning about it, but with everything going on > with udev, systemd, etc, I'm not risking updating unless/until I know it is > safe. > > Tia... > > Charles > I took one stable machine with almost no ~amd64 packages and updated. No problems here. YMMV. HTH, Mark