[gentoo-user] systemd-boot on openrc

[gentoo-user] systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

Hello list,

I've been using bootctl from sys-boot/systemd-boot for several years, with 
some success, but I'm stuck after today's --sync.

First I was told I had to keyword sys-apps/systemd-utils, so I did that, but 
now I get this, which I can't decode:

Calculating dependencies  ... . ..... done!
[ebuild  N    ~] sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4::gentoo  USE="boot (split-usr) 
sysusers tmpfiles udev (-selinux) -test" ABI_X86="(64) -32 (-x32)" 10,872 KiB
[ebuild     U ~] sys-boot/systemd-boot-250::gentoo [249.9::gentoo] 0 KiB
[blocks b      ] <sys-boot/systemd-boot-250 ("<sys-boot/systemd-boot-250" is 
soft blocking sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4)
[blocks B      ] <sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-250 ("<sys-apps/systemd-
tmpfiles-250" is soft blocking sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4)
[blocks B      ] <sys-fs/udev-250 ("<sys-fs/udev-250" is soft blocking sys-
apps/systemd-utils-250.4)

Total: 2 packages (1 upgrade, 1 new), Size of downloads: 10,872 KiB
Conflict: 3 blocks (2 unsatisfied)

 * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
 * installed at the same time on the same system.

  (sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-249.9-2:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
    sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles required by (virtual/tmpfiles-0-r1-1:0/0::gentoo, 
installed) USE="" ABI_X86="(64)"

  (sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) 
pulled in by
    sys-apps/systemd-utils[udev] required by (sys-boot/systemd-
boot-250:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) USE="" ABI_X86="(64)"

  (sys-fs/udev-249.6-r2-3:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
    >=sys-fs/
udev-232:0/0[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?] 
(>=sys-fs/udev-232:0/0[abi_x86_64(-)]) required by (virtual/libudev-232-
r5-2:0/1::gentoo, installed) USE="-systemd" ABI_X86="(64) -32 (-x32)"
    >=sys-fs/udev-217 required by (virtual/udev-217-r3-1:0/0::gentoo, 
installed) USE="" ABI_X86="(64)"

This is an amd64 openrc system. On another system, ~amd64 openrc, I was told 
to set USE=boot on systemd-utils, so I did that and now when I boot I have no 
mouse or keyboard.

Is this the end of the road for systemd-boot on openrc?

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] systemd-boot on openrc

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2880 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 Apr 2022 11:41:23 +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote:

> I've been using bootctl from sys-boot/systemd-boot for several years,
> with some success, but I'm stuck after today's --sync.
> 
> First I was told I had to keyword sys-apps/systemd-utils, so I did
> that, but now I get this, which I can't decode:
> 
> Calculating dependencies  ... . ..... done!
> [ebuild  N    ~] sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4::gentoo  USE="boot
> (split-usr) sysusers tmpfiles udev (-selinux) -test" ABI_X86="(64) -32
> (-x32)" 10,872 KiB [ebuild     U ~] sys-boot/systemd-boot-250::gentoo
> [249.9::gentoo] 0 KiB [blocks b      ] <sys-boot/systemd-boot-250
> ("<sys-boot/systemd-boot-250" is soft blocking
> sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4) [blocks B      ]
> <sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-250 ("<sys-apps/systemd- tmpfiles-250" is
> soft blocking sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4) [blocks B      ]
> <sys-fs/udev-250 ("<sys-fs/udev-250" is soft blocking sys-
> apps/systemd-utils-250.4)
> 
> Total: 2 packages (1 upgrade, 1 new), Size of downloads: 10,872 KiB
> Conflict: 3 blocks (2 unsatisfied)
> 
>  * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
>  * installed at the same time on the same system.
> 
>   (sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-249.9-2:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in
> by sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles required by
> (virtual/tmpfiles-0-r1-1:0/0::gentoo, installed) USE="" ABI_X86="(64)"
> 
>   (sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for
> merge) pulled in by
>     sys-apps/systemd-utils[udev] required by (sys-boot/systemd-
> boot-250:0/0::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) USE="" ABI_X86="(64)"
> 
>   (sys-fs/udev-249.6-r2-3:0/0::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>     >=sys-fs/  
> udev-232:0/0[abi_x86_32(-)?,abi_x86_64(-)?,abi_x86_x32(-)?,abi_mips_n32(-)?,abi_mips_n64(-)?,abi_mips_o32(-)?,abi_s390_32(-)?,abi_s390_64(-)?] 
> (>=sys-fs/udev-232:0/0[abi_x86_64(-)]) required by
> (virtual/libudev-232- r5-2:0/1::gentoo, installed) USE="-systemd"
> ABI_X86="(64) -32 (-x32)"
>     >=sys-fs/udev-217 required by (virtual/udev-217-r3-1:0/0::gentoo,   
> installed) USE="" ABI_X86="(64)"
> 
> This is an amd64 openrc system.

It looks like this is cause my using mixed keywords, amd64 for udev and
~amd64 for systemd-boot/utils. Does keywording udev-250 resolve the
blocks?

> On another system, ~amd64 openrc, I was
> told to set USE=boot on systemd-utils, so I did that and now when I
> boot I have no mouse or keyboard.
> 
> Is this the end of the road for systemd-boot on openrc?

I think that USE flag just causes the systemd-boot part of systemd-utils
to be built. systemd-boot itself is just a virtual now. It doesn't sound
like that would cause this problem, did you emerge anything X related at
the same time?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

without C people would code in Basi, Pasal and Obol

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 12:13:06 -00 Neil Bothwick wrote:

--->8
> It looks like this is cause my using mixed keywords, amd64 for udev and
> ~amd64 for systemd-boot/utils. Does keywording udev-250 resolve the
> blocks?

Yes, after keywording several others, thus:

~sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-249.9
~sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4
~sys-fs/udev-250 
~virtual/tmpfiles-0-r2 

But then, after rebooting because of the udev update, systemd-boot-250-r1 has 
come in. I can't revert those keywords though, because then I'd have to ditch 
elogind in favour of systemd. I really do not want to do that.

So I have a running system now - thanks. If this gets more complicated in 
future, I can always try blocking =>sys-boot/systemd-boot-250.

> > On another system, ~amd64 openrc, I was
> > told to set USE=boot on systemd-utils, so I did that and now when I
> > boot I have no mouse or keyboard.
> > 
> > Is this the end of the road for systemd-boot on openrc?
> 
> I think that USE flag just causes the systemd-boot part of systemd-utils
> to be built. systemd-boot itself is just a virtual now. It doesn't sound
> like that would cause this problem, did you emerge anything X related at
> the same time?

Nope, nothing else. And I forgot to say that smartd failed to start on that 
machine too, with nothing in dmesg or /var/log/messages. (I'm working on that 
machine via ssh.)

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] systemd-boot on openrc

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 9:03 AM Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 17 April 2022 12:13:06 -00 Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
> --->8
> > It looks like this is cause my using mixed keywords, amd64 for udev and
> > ~amd64 for systemd-boot/utils. Does keywording udev-250 resolve the
> > blocks?
>
> Yes, after keywording several others, thus:
>
> ~sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-249.9
> ~sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4
> ~sys-fs/udev-250
> ~virtual/tmpfiles-0-r2
>
> But then, after rebooting because of the udev update, systemd-boot-250-r1 has
> come in. I can't revert those keywords though, because then I'd have to ditch
> elogind in favour of systemd. I really do not want to do that.

Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?

If I need to bump a package up to ~arch temporarily usually I just do
it with an atom like "<sys-apps/systemd-utils-251" or something like
that, so that I keep getting ~arch updates within the major version,
but the next major bump happens when it hits stable.  Obviously you
need to understand the versioning/stabilization policies for the
packages involved if you do that, and it is situational, but you
really shouldn't be mixing keywords anyway unless you're comfortable
with that.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 9:03 AM Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> 
wrote:
> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 12:13:06 -00 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > 
> > --->8
> > 
> > > It looks like this is cause my using mixed keywords, amd64 for udev and
> > > ~amd64 for systemd-boot/utils. Does keywording udev-250 resolve the
> > > blocks?
> > 
> > Yes, after keywording several others, thus:
> > 
> > ~sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-249.9
> > ~sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4
> > ~sys-fs/udev-250
> > ~virtual/tmpfiles-0-r2
> > 
> > But then, after rebooting because of the udev update, systemd-boot-250-r1
> > has come in. I can't revert those keywords though, because then I'd have
> > to ditch elogind in favour of systemd. I really do not want to do that.
> 
> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?

No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching from 
elogind to systemd.

> If I need to bump a package up to ~arch temporarily usually I just do
> it with an atom like "<sys-apps/systemd-utils-251" or something like
> that, so that I keep getting ~arch updates within the major version,
> but the next major bump happens when it hits stable.  Obviously you
> need to understand the versioning/stabilization policies for the
> packages involved if you do that, and it is situational, but you
> really shouldn't be mixing keywords anyway unless you're comfortable
> with that.

No, I know it's a bad idea to mix keywords, but how else do I get systemd-boot 
on a stable system?

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

[gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Martin Vaeth]

Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?
>
> No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching from
> elogind to systemd.

No, USE=boot for systemd-util does not trigger anything like that.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 16:42:35 -00 Martin Vaeth wrote:
> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?
> > 
> > No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching from
> > elogind to systemd.
> 
> No, USE=boot for systemd-util does not trigger anything like that.

I meant, if I set that flag, portage wants me to remove elogind andinstall 
systemd.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

[gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Martin Vaeth]

Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sunday, 17 April 2022 16:42:35 -00 Martin Vaeth wrote:
>> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
>> >> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?
>> >
>> > No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching from
>> > elogind to systemd.
>>
>> No, USE=boot for systemd-util does not trigger anything like that.
>
> I meant, if I set that flag, portage wants me to remove elogind andinstall
> systemd.

Maybe, but the fault is certainly not this flag but something else.
For instance, that you do not have keyworded something which you should have.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 17:05:18 -00 Martin Vaeth wrote:
> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 16:42:35 -00 Martin Vaeth wrote:
> >> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> >> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?
> >> > 
> >> > No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching
> >> > from
> >> > elogind to systemd.
> >> 
> >> No, USE=boot for systemd-util does not trigger anything like that.
> > 
> > I meant, if I set that flag, portage wants me to remove elogind andinstall
> > systemd.
> 
> Maybe, but the fault is certainly not this flag but something else.
> For instance, that you do not have keyworded something which you should
> have.

Ok. I'll look again in the morning.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 1:05 PM Martin Vaeth <martin@mvath.de> wrote:
>
> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 16:42:35 -00 Martin Vaeth wrote:
> >> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> >> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?
> >> >
> >> > No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching from
> >> > elogind to systemd.
> >>
> >> No, USE=boot for systemd-util does not trigger anything like that.
> >
> > I meant, if I set that flag, portage wants me to remove elogind andinstall
> > systemd.
>
> Maybe, but the fault is certainly not this flag but something else.
> For instance, that you do not have keyworded something which you should have.

It would probably be helpful to post more relevant output, like
portage output including --verbose and so on so that it is clear what
it is actually doing.

systemd-utils blocks systemd, so I can't see how it could force you to
install systemd (after all, it just supplies things that are otherwise
bundled with systemd already).  Maybe in addition to setting the boot
USE flag you also changed something else?

--
Rich

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

On Sunday, 17 April 2022 20:17:47 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 1:05 PM Martin Vaeth <martin@mvath.de> wrote:
> > Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 16:42:35 -00 Martin Vaeth wrote:
> > >> Peter Humphrey <peter@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> > >> > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote:
> > >> >> Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils?  Why revert?
> > >> > 
> > >> > No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching
> > >> > from
> > >> > elogind to systemd.
> > >> 
> > >> No, USE=boot for systemd-util does not trigger anything like that.
> > > 
> > > I meant, if I set that flag, portage wants me to remove elogind
> > > andinstall
> > > systemd.
> > 
> > Maybe, but the fault is certainly not this flag but something else.
> > For instance, that you do not have keyworded something which you should
> > have.
> It would probably be helpful to post more relevant output, like
> portage output including --verbose and so on so that it is clear what
> it is actually doing.
> 
> systemd-utils blocks systemd, so I can't see how it could force you to
> install systemd (after all, it just supplies things that are otherwise
> bundled with systemd already).  Maybe in addition to setting the boot
> USE flag you also changed something else?

The machine is sick. I now have no mouse or keyboard after POST. They're fine 
in UEFI BIOS setup, and they're fine after the default kernel has finished 
booting - just not at boot menu time.

:(

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Peter Humphrey]

On Monday, 18 April 2022 16:05:24 -00 Peter Humphrey wrote:

> The machine is sick. I now have no mouse or keyboard after POST. They're
> fine in UEFI BIOS setup, and they're fine after the default kernel has
> finished booting - just not at boot menu time.

And now it's perfectly all right. What is one supposed to do in the face of 
such chaos?

I confess that the machine is perilously close to being hurled through the 
window.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Jack]

On 4/18/22 22:53, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday, 18 April 2022 16:05:24 -00 Peter Humphrey wrote:
>> The machine is sick. I now have no mouse or keyboard after POST. They're
>> fine in UEFI BIOS setup, and they're fine after the default kernel has
>> finished booting - just not at boot menu time.
> And now it's perfectly all right. What is one supposed to do in the face of
> such chaos?
>
> I confess that the machine is perilously close to being hurled through the
> window.

I generally blame such behavior on "phase of the moon and blue magic 
dust."  Is it time to go to your local church to ask if the priest will 
perform an exorcism?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Dale]

Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Monday, 18 April 2022 16:05:24 -00 Peter Humphrey wrote:
>
>> The machine is sick. I now have no mouse or keyboard after POST. They're
>> fine in UEFI BIOS setup, and they're fine after the default kernel has
>> finished booting - just not at boot menu time.
> And now it's perfectly all right. What is one supposed to do in the face of 
> such chaos?
>
> I confess that the machine is perilously close to being hurled through the 
> window.
>


Get sledge hammer, bigger is better.  Place sledge hammer beside
computer.  Use a camera if the puter has one.  Let computer know that is
Plan B, there is no Plan C.  :-) 

I've done it before with hal.  Neil, remember my situation with hal?  ;-) 

Hope that helps.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: systemd-boot on openrc

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 828 bytes --]

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 01:09:02 -0500, Dale wrote:

> > And now it's perfectly all right. What is one supposed to do in the
> > face of such chaos?
> >
> > I confess that the machine is perilously close to being hurled
> > through the window.

There were updates to udev and systemd-utils, I wonder if they fixed it.

> Get sledge hammer, bigger is better.  Place sledge hammer beside
> computer.  Use a camera if the puter has one.  Let computer know that is
> Plan B, there is no Plan C.  :-) 
> 
> I've done it before with hal.  Neil, remember my situation with hal?
> ;-) 

I try not to :-/


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Ninety-Ninety Rule Of Project Schedules - The first ninety percent of
the task takes ninety percent of the time, and the last ten percent
takes the other ninety percent of the time.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]