On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > To be honest, I don't know if there's other way to hide USE flags than
> > using USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN. If we want to use that, we'd have to split
> > the flags per-arch, i.e. have:
> >
> > MULTILIB_AMD64="abi1 abi2 abi3"
> > MULTILIB_
> If the euscan guys want to integrate the feature, nice.
> If not, lets just stick with this script. It is simple enough that even
> ruby n00bs like me can understand what it does :P
I'm a ruby noob and seems pretty simple, I don't think that porting it
to python would be a huge effort. Moreover
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:57 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> Second reason, I believe it is getting or already has deployment on
> gentoo infra servers.
euscan is not getting implemented on infra server because noone
requested it. Again, whoever is responsible for any service and wants
it implemented i
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:26 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
> > > To be honest, I don't know if there's other way to hide USE flags
> > > than using USE_EXPAND_HIDDEN. If we want to use that, we'd have
> > > to split the flags per-arch,
I hope this is going to be binary package manager friendly.
In Sabayon for instance, kernel sources are not even installed and at
the same time, /proc/config.gz may not even be available.
There were some corner cases in where pkg_setup failed because this
kernel config check stuff was trying to be
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> I hope this is going to be binary package manager friendly.
> In Sabayon for instance, kernel sources are not even installed and at
> the same time, /proc/config.gz may not even be available.
> There were some corner cases in where pkg_setu
please review this news item, seems we need one after all
Title: Upgrading udev from 171 (or older) to 197
Author: Samuli Suominen
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2013-01-23
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Display-If-Installed: http://bugs.gentoo.org/453494
[2] http://www.freedesktop.org/wik
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
+1, this would have been useful.
On 23 January 2013 13:32, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
>
> +1, this would have been useful.
>
Looks ok but as the news item says, it's a bit too late ...
--
Regards,
Markos Chandras
On 23/01/13 15:34, Markos Chandras wrote:
On 23 January 2013 13:32, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
please review this news item, seems we need one after all
+1, this would have been useful.
Looks ok but as the news item says, it's a bit too
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> not for everyone, not everyone upgrades this often, and it's usually the
> servers that get updated last
Agreed, but best to get this out ASAP.
Only question - display-if-installed is set to <. Would it make
sense to make it <198 ins
130123 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
...
> - The need of CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y in the kernel; need to verify the fstype for
> possible /dev line in /etc/fstab is devtmpfs (and not, for example, tmpfs)
...
I have 2 such lines :
tmpfs
On 23/01/2013 15:02, Philip Webb wrote:
>> > - The need of CONFIG_DEVTMPFS=y in the kernel; need to verify the fstype
>> > for
>> > possible /dev line in /etc/fstab is devtmpfs (and not, for example,
>> > tmpfs)
> ...
>
> I have 2 such lines :
>
> tmpfs /tmp
On 23/01/13 15:44, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Samuli Suominen wrote:
not for everyone, not everyone upgrades this often, and it's usually the
servers that get updated last
Agreed, but best to get this out ASAP.
Only question - display-if-installed is set to <.
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
>
> None are involved. The second column would read /dev if it was involved.
The news item doesn't mention what to do if there is no line to mount
/dev. I don't see one in my fstab, and I simply followed the handbook
(as it was written ~
On 23/01/2013 16:04, Rich Freeman wrote:
> System seems to work fine, so I'm not sure how essential that line is.
> The fact that I'm using an initramfs might also have an effect.
AFAICT if you do NOT have a /dev entry you're the best off because the
init script will mount it for you.
I think th
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:03:56 -0300
Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:26 +0100
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300
> > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> >
> > > > To be honest, I don't know if there's other way to hide USE flags
> > > > than using USE_EXPAND_HI
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:27:17 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:03:56 -0300
> Alexis Ballier wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:26 +0100
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300
> > > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > >
> > > > > To be honest, I don't
Hi,
On 01/23/2013 04:04 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> System seems to work fine, so I'm not sure how essential that line is.
> The fact that I'm using an initramfs might also have an effect.
I'd strongly suggest using CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT=y.
and stop worring about udev/openrc.
udev/openrc stopped
В письме от 23 января 2013 08:03:56 пользователь Alexis Ballier написал:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:26 +0100
>
> Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300
> >
> > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > > To be honest, I don't know if there's other way to hide USE flags
> > > > than using
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
Hello Samuli,
/dev/root is no longer available in this udev version, so people who put
this in their /etc/fstab might end up with an unbootable system.
I suggest including in the news item, that /dev/root must be
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Felix Kuperjans
wrote:
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
>
> Hello Samuli,
>
> /dev/root is no longer available in this udev version, so people who put
> this in their /etc/fstab might end up with an unbootable sy
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:36:22 +0400
Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> В письме от 23 января 2013 08:03:56 пользователь Alexis Ballier
> написал:
> > On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:24:26 +0100
> >
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:27:30 -0300
> > >
> > > Alexis Ballier wrote:
> > > > > To be
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> fstab is not consulted for mounting the root filesystem, so it doesn't
> really matter what you have in there. Either the kernel mounts it
> based on the kernel command line, or your initramfs mounts it based on
> whatever your /init programs
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>> fstab is not consulted for mounting the root filesystem, so it doesn't
>> really matter what you have in there. Either the kernel mounts it
>> based on the kernel command line, or your i
Mike Gilbert:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Felix Kuperjans
> wrote:
>> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>>> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
>> Hello Samuli,
>>
>> /dev/root is no longer available in this udev version, so people who put
>> this in their /etc/fstab might end up
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> Ah, good to know. I'm used to dealing with my little homegrown
> initramfs, where I parse root from the kernel command line in /init.
> genkernel does the same thing.
Yeah, dracut generally "does the right thing" but that generally
assumes
Hi guys,
do we have some scans that report libraries converted to subslots and
lists their rdeps checked if they are updated accordingly?
It might be pretty usefull to actually see where the deps needed to be
updated so we can take use of this feature where possible (also its a
hint for lib mainta
El mié, 23-01-2013 a las 15:14 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
Why don't you drop "~" from:
CONFIG_CHECK="~DEVTMPFS"
to ensure people really changes it in their kernel and prevent breakage?
signature.asc
Description: This is a
I think that the problem is that it is trying to be smart when it's
not really possible (unless you want to cover all the corner cases,
which is a pain).
--
Fabio Erculiani
On 23/01/13 23:21, Pacho Ramos wrote:
El mié, 23-01-2013 a las 15:14 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
please review this news item, seems we need one after all
Why don't you drop "~" from:
CONFIG_CHECK="~DEVTMPFS"
to ensure people really changes it in their kernel and prevent breakag
Are you sure? I have CONFIG_DEVTMPFS_MOUNT disabled, latest stable udev
(197-r3) and openrc (0.11.8), and no /dev line in my fstab, yet my /dev
is still a devtmpfs with a proper set of device nodes.
Chris
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:03:15 +0100
Michael Weber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/23/2013 04:04 PM,
El mié, 23-01-2013 a las 23:45 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> On 23/01/13 23:21, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El mié, 23-01-2013 a las 15:14 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> >> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
> >
> > Why don't you drop "~" from:
> > CONFIG_CHECK="
Hi all,
this patch adds support for building plugins in different directory.
This has been a long TODO item but there is now a need for it since the
amrnb and amrwb codecs both depend on the same lib and I see no reason
to not have them under the same ebuild.
I am attaching the sample ebuild wit
2013/1/23 Pacho Ramos
> El mié, 23-01-2013 a las 23:45 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> > On 23/01/13 23:21, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > > El mié, 23-01-2013 a las 15:14 +0200, Samuli Suominen escribió:
> > >> please review this news item, seems we need one after all
> > >
> > > Why don't you drop "
2013/1/23 Fabio Erculiani
> I think that the problem is that it is trying to be smart when it's
> not really possible (unless you want to cover all the corner cases,
> which is a pain).
>
>
> Hum, but if we could not be smart enough we can at least try to be very
annoying.
what about a delay of s
Hello,
Following my earlier mail, I'm sending two patches which describe how
I see the potential of introducing explicit multilib flags.
The idea is that each arch has its own ABI_ USE_EXPAND, specifying
the multilib ABIs for choice. For example, x86 has ABI_X86="32 64".
All of those USE_EXPANDs
64- and 32-bit libs involved. No x32 yet since I have no idea about it.
---
gx86/profiles/arch/amd64/make.defaults | 4
gx86/profiles/arch/amd64/use.force | 4
gx86/profiles/arch/amd64/use.mask | 5 +
gx86/profiles/base/make.defaults | 4 ++--
gx86/profiles/base/use.ma
This is mostly a proof-of-concept. If approved, I will work on moving
the code into a separate eclass, possibly named 'multilib-build' ;).
---
gx86/eclass/autotools-multilib.eclass | 24 +---
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/autotools-m
On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:23:57 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> This is mostly a proof-of-concept. If approved, I will work on moving
> the code into a separate eclass, possibly named 'multilib-build' ;).
> ---
> gx86/eclass/autotools-multilib.eclass | 24 +---
> 1 file changed, 21
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:32:40PM +, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> I hope this is going to be binary package manager friendly.
> In Sabayon for instance, kernel sources are not even installed and at
> the same time, /proc/config.gz may not even be available.
> There were some corner cases in where
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 13:49:09 -0800
Christopher Head wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 17:03:15 +0100
> Michael Weber wrote:
>
> > On 01/23/2013 04:04 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > > System seems to work fine, so I'm not sure how essential that line
> > > is. The fact that I'm using an initramfs migh
On 23/01/13 21:06, Felix Kuperjans wrote:
Mike Gilbert:
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Felix Kuperjans
wrote:
Samuli Suominen wrote:
please review this news item, seems we need one after all
Hello Samuli,
/dev/root is no longer available in this udev version, so people who put
this in the
Samuli Suominen posted on Thu, 24 Jan 2013 04:04:19 +0200 as excerpted:
> On 23/01/13 21:06, Felix Kuperjans wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Felix Kuperjans
>>> wrote:
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> please review this news item
/dev/root is no longer available in this ude
Duncan wrote:
> Samuli Suominen posted on Thu, 24 Jan 2013 04:04:19 +0200 as excerpted:
>
>> > On 23/01/13 21:06, Felix Kuperjans wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Felix Kuperjans
>>> wrote:
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> > please review this news item
>
45 matches
Mail list logo
