Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
Bruce Hill wrote: Too late, too tired, but do you have: =sys-fs/udev-181 in /etc/portage/package.mask ? Ehm... according to http://packages.gentoo.org/category/sys-fs?full_cat udev-171-r9 is the only stable x86 version, and udev-181 doesn't exist at all?! -Matt (still using 171 because at emerge -u world, an update never appeared)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 12:19:09AM -0600, Dustin C. Hatch wrote: The problem is you are trying to downgrade sys-fs/udev but not virtual/udev. If you want to force using udev-171, you need to mask both the real and virtual atoms. Try this in /etc/portage/package.mask/udev: =sys-fs/udev-181 =virtual/udev-181 Then emerge -avuD1 udev and see if that fixes it. Maybe this is true for a downgrade, but not normally: mingdao@workstation ~ $ eshowkw udev Keywords for sys-fs/udev: | | u | | a a p s | n | | l m h i m m p s p | u s | r | p d a p a 6 i p c 3 a x | s l | e | h 6 r p 6 8 p p 6 9 s r 8 | e o | p | a 4 m a 4 k s c 4 0 h c 6 | d t | o ---+---+-+--- 141-r1 | ~ ~ ~ + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | # 0 | gentoo 146-r1 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | # | gentoo 149 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | # | gentoo 151-r4 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | # | gentoo 164-r2 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | # | gentoo [I]171-r9 | + + + + + + ~ + + + + + + | o | gentoo 171-r10 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | o | gentoo 195 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | # | gentoo 196-r1 | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | o | gentoo | o o o o o o o o o o o o o | o | gentoo mingdao@workstation ~ $ cat /etc/portage/package.mask =sys-fs/udev-181 =dev-lang/python-3 And, yes, this udev mask is used on 8 Gentoo boxen on this LAN. -- Happy Penguin Computers ') 126 Fenco Drive ( \ Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^ supp...@happypenguincomputers.com 662-269-2706 662-205-6424 http://happypenguincomputers.com/ Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
[gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
Dustin C. Hatch admiralnemo at gmail.com writes: The problem is you are trying to downgrade sys-fs/udev but not virtual/udev. If you want to force using udev-171, you need to mask both the real and virtual atoms. Try this in /etc/portage/package.mask/udev: =sys-fs/udev-181 =virtual/udev-181 Then emerge -avuD1 udev and see if that fixes it. I get the downgrades you would expect: UD ] virtual/udev-171 [196] UD ] sys-fs/udev-171-r9 I also get some weird companion downgrades: blocks B ] x11-libs/qt-script-4.8.2-r:4 (x11-libs/qt-script-4.8.2-r:4 is blocking x11-libs/qt-declarative-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-webkit-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-svg-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-test-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-xmlpatterns-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-multimedia-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-opengl-4.8.2) [blocks B ] x11-libs/qt-gui-4.8.4:4 snip and these: Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict: virtual/udev:0 (virtual/udev-171::gentoo,ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by virtual/udev-196 required by (sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.88::gentoo, installed) =virtual/udev-171 required by (kde-base/kdelibs-4.9.3::gentoo, installed) (and 17 more with the same problems) (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed) pulled in by =virtual/udev-180 required by (sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) (and 1 more with the same problem) sys-fs/udev:0 (sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) pulled in by =sys-fs/udev-196-r1[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?,static-libs?] required by (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed) (sys-fs/udev-171-r9::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by ~sys-fs/udev-171[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?] required by (virtual/udev-171::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) snip Does this look normal? James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:23 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: snip 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On 1/4/2013 10:23, James wrote: Dustin C. Hatch admiralnemo at gmail.com writes: The problem is you are trying to downgrade sys-fs/udev but not virtual/udev. If you want to force using udev-171, you need to mask both the real and virtual atoms. Try this in /etc/portage/package.mask/udev: =sys-fs/udev-181 =virtual/udev-181 Then emerge -avuD1 udev and see if that fixes it. I get the downgrades you would expect: UD ] virtual/udev-171 [196] UD ] sys-fs/udev-171-r9 I also get some weird companion downgrades: blocks B ] x11-libs/qt-script-4.8.2-r:4 (x11-libs/qt-script-4.8.2-r:4 is blocking x11-libs/qt-declarative-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-webkit-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-svg-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-test-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-xmlpatterns-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-multimedia-4.8.2, x11-libs/qt-opengl-4.8.2) [blocks B ] x11-libs/qt-gui-4.8.4:4 snip I don't have Qt installed anywhere, so I can't reproduce that problem. I also don't see that particular version of qt-script in the tree, so I can't be sure, but my guess is some Qt dep that you already have installed depends on a newer version of udev than you will be getting after the downgrade, thus requiring it to downgrade as well. and these: Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled !!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict: virtual/udev:0 (virtual/udev-171::gentoo,ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by virtual/udev-196 required by (sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.88::gentoo, installed) =virtual/udev-171 required by (kde-base/kdelibs-4.9.3::gentoo, installed) (and 17 more with the same problems) (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed) pulled in by =virtual/udev-180 required by (sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) (and 1 more with the same problem) sys-fs/udev:0 (sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) pulled in by =sys-fs/udev-196-r1[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?,static-libs?] required by (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed) (sys-fs/udev-171-r9::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by ~sys-fs/udev-171[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?] required by (virtual/udev-171::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) snip Does this look normal? Yes, I expected something like that. In all likelihood, you'll need to completely remove sys-fs/udev and virtual/udev and then reinstall the older version. You'll probably want to do this in single user mode (i.e. `rc single`), so running programs don't crash suddenly. A reboot afterward is probably a good idea as well. -- ♫Dustin
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:52:29 -0600 Dustin C. Hatch admiraln...@gmail.com wrote: You'll probably want to do this in single user mode (i.e. `rc single`), so running programs don't crash suddenly. A reboot afterward is probably a good idea as well. I'm interested in what may crash, do you mean after logging out and in again etc.. I have started and stopped udev in the past during testing without any apparent problems.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On 1/4/2013 14:31, Kevin Chadwick wrote: On Fri, 04 Jan 2013 13:52:29 -0600 Dustin C. Hatch admiraln...@gmail.com wrote: You'll probably want to do this in single user mode (i.e. `rc single`), so running programs don't crash suddenly. A reboot afterward is probably a good idea as well. I'm interested in what may crash, do you mean after logging out and in again etc.. I have started and stopped udev in the past during testing without any apparent problems. I'm not sure what would crash, if anything. It may very well be fine; I was just offering the suggestion just in case. If it were me doing it, I'd at least do it on a virtual console and not in an X11 terminal, in case your keyboard stops working (which seems unlikely, but I've learned that nothing is too crazy to expect when dealing with udev) -- ♫Dustin
[gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
James wireless at tampabay.rr.com writes:
So unless somebody can give me good reason, I'm downgrading to
udev-171 asap on this (only) system running udev 196...
(ps, I like to experiment, but not with udev et. al.)
Long night, when you have to answer your own posts.
Now I get:
emerge -p1u udev
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild UD ] sys-fs/udev-171-r9 [196-r1] USE=rule_generator%*
-action_modeswitch% -build% -debug% -edd% (-extras) -floppy% {-test%}
[blocks B ] sys-fs/udev-186 (sys-fs/udev-186 is blocking
sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-17-r1)
!!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
!!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
sys-fs/udev:0
(sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
=sys-fs/udev-196-r1[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?,static-libs?]
required by (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed)
(sys-fs/udev-171-r9::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
(no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
ideas?
James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 02:54:31AM +, James wrote:
James wireless at tampabay.rr.com writes:
So unless somebody can give me good reason, I'm downgrading to
udev-171 asap on this (only) system running udev 196...
(ps, I like to experiment, but not with udev et. al.)
Long night, when you have to answer your own posts.
Now I get:
emerge -p1u udev
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild UD ] sys-fs/udev-171-r9 [196-r1] USE=rule_generator%*
-action_modeswitch% -build% -debug% -edd% (-extras) -floppy% {-test%}
[blocks B ] sys-fs/udev-186 (sys-fs/udev-186 is blocking
sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-17-r1)
!!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
!!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
sys-fs/udev:0
(sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
=sys-fs/udev-196-r1[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?,static-libs?]
required by (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed)
(sys-fs/udev-171-r9::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
(no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
ideas?
James
Too late, too tired, but do you have:
=sys-fs/udev-181
in /etc/portage/package.mask ?
--
Happy Penguin Computers ')
126 Fenco Drive ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801 ^^
supp...@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/
Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: udev downgrade
On 1/3/2013 20:54, James wrote:
James wireless at tampabay.rr.com writes:
So unless somebody can give me good reason, I'm downgrading to
udev-171 asap on this (only) system running udev 196...
(ps, I like to experiment, but not with udev et. al.)
Long night, when you have to answer your own posts.
Now I get:
emerge -p1u udev
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild UD ] sys-fs/udev-171-r9 [196-r1] USE=rule_generator%*
-action_modeswitch% -build% -debug% -edd% (-extras) -floppy% {-test%}
[blocks B ] sys-fs/udev-186 (sys-fs/udev-186 is blocking
sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-17-r1)
!!! Multiple package instances within a single package slot have been pulled
!!! into the dependency graph, resulting in a slot conflict:
sys-fs/udev:0
(sys-fs/udev-196-r1::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
=sys-fs/udev-196-r1[gudev?,hwdb?,introspection?,keymap?,selinux?,static-libs?]
required by (virtual/udev-196::gentoo, installed)
(sys-fs/udev-171-r9::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
(no parents that aren't satisfied by other packages in this slot)
ideas?
James
The problem is you are trying to downgrade sys-fs/udev but not
virtual/udev. If you want to force using udev-171, you need to mask both
the real and virtual atoms. Try this in /etc/portage/package.mask/udev:
=sys-fs/udev-181
=virtual/udev-181
Then emerge -avuD1 udev and see if that fixes it.
--
♫Dustin
