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 660271382B5 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:29:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 99A6121C0A3; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:29:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com (mail-qc0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 086CB21C01D for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:28:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id b25so8959559qca.31 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 09:28:34 -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=GvKH+N0JWXHsYBNCMbTEPPz9w37/JRG6gNk2C1RuL7o=; b=EuWNoXoYpdvCQpT88K2rma11ekpSWPlDDzuLLz7FRZ8b0+ucH3goSYeC3ndOdWJgLw UDmWlffV+YtNvqu+YV5TnkUgzpiQNJnqyeCK+uPfRNn5CUQ1XcKe0402uyd8338dGTA+ 3sjhL7B7Bni1dYZiX7llIyjHeVR/GAVpYsnl6lKPFtkOeXRg2zllnzjrXNpr3mlX50wy vfLtGfFEDsLh3pW+5H0ktC4k2NcBws+jmPrxzFpzXE1vygLF/CEIRDdfnQVweXl4yD7n dsxL8ooU3iB+Uxh5iuy9F1JoNRGWoqDl3G/mgHMjmNwSYIVQF6M/NyATgdoB4zJy0eV4 cVDA== 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 10.224.31.16 with SMTP id w16mr27000546qac.52.1357320514162; Fri, 04 Jan 2013 09:28:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.186.132 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Jan 2013 09:28:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <50E6745D.5020509@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 09:28:33 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade From: Mark Knecht To: Gentoo User Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 9194900f-2d7a-4888-9a36-796bc0d5fff9 X-Archives-Hash: 22950fece3981a26f2b529d24fbe4de5 On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:23 AM, James wrote: > > > Does this look normal? > > > James Does anything when you are running unstable (~amd64) and then trying to push it toward stable? That's always been difficult and dare I say unsupported. OK, I only run stable so I have no experience in this area however I am wondering whether you tried to temporize to something like mdev stable, and went from mdev stable to udev stable if the results might be more predictable/less obscure? Just a thought, Mark