[gentoo-user] Re: portage 2.2 in ~amd64

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 07:04:39 -0400 Tanstaafl wrote: > So... is 2.2 *ever* going to go stable??? Hopefully, 2.2.1 will be stabilized. See zmedico's comments 5 and 6 at .

Re: [gentoo-user] grub2 or kernel config - unable to properly boot [SOLVED]

In linux.gentoo.user, you wrote: > > While trying to learn about dracut, I found a detail that made me look > closer to the genkernel generated initramfs, and I found that the error > message was perfectly clear: there was no /dev/sda5, where my "real_root" > is, that initramfs has just /dev/sda1 t

Re: [gentoo-user] grub2 or kernel config - unable to properly boot [SOLVED]

2013/8/28 Francisco Ares > > 2013/8/28 Michael Hampicke > >> Am 27.08.2013 22:40, schrieb Francisco Ares: >> >> >> >> I think I might have found it. Although I have selected in the kernel >> >> "menuconfig" to compress the initramfs using gzip and deselected all >> other >> >> decompression for

Re: [gentoo-user] grub2 or kernel config - unable to properly boot

2013/8/28 Michael Hampicke > Am 27.08.2013 22:40, schrieb Francisco Ares: > >> > >> I think I might have found it. Although I have selected in the kernel > >> "menuconfig" to compress the initramfs using gzip and deselected all > other > >> decompression forms. a simple "file initramfs-xxx" told

Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 07:04:39 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote: > So... is 2.2 *ever* going to go stable??? Give it a chance! It's only just come out of rc. Until recently it wasn't even available in testing without umasking. -- Neil Bothwick Does fuzzy logic tickle? signature.asc Description: PGP sig

Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo

Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2013-08-27 5:06 PM, Joerg Schilling > wrote: > > You wrote that modules become derivatives of the Linux kernel and this is > > the > > same as writing ZFS would become a kernel derivative. > > Just for clarification, I was talking about compiling ZFS support INTO > the k

Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo

On 28/08/2013 12:58, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2013-08-27 5:06 PM, Joerg Schilling > wrote: >> You wrote that modules become derivatives of the Linux kernel and this >> is the >> same as writing ZFS would become a kernel derivative. > > Just for clarification, I was talking about compiling ZFS suppor

Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64

On 28/08/2013 13:04, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2013-08-27 5:27 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: >> I was away for two weeks. I just resynced and see that 2.2.1 is now in >> testing (and my current version 2.1.13.1 is not in the tree). >> >> Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the c

Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64

On 2013-08-27 5:27 PM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: I was away for two weeks. I just resynced and see that 2.2.1 is now in testing (and my current version 2.1.13.1 is not in the tree). Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I kn

Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo

On 2013-08-27 5:06 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: You wrote that modules become derivatives of the Linux kernel and this is the same as writing ZFS would become a kernel derivative. Just for clarification, I was talking about compiling ZFS support INTO the kernel, not running it as a module. Do

Re: [gentoo-user] Optional /usr merge in Gentoo

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > On 27/08/2013 14:05, Tanstaafl wrote: [-- snippy --] > > Thanks Alan, starting to get excited about playing with ZFS. > > > > How would you rate their docs and support community (for the free version)? > > Support is top-notch, on par wit

Re: [gentoo-user] portage 2.2 in ~amd64

On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:27:30 -0400, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: > Am I correct in believing that when I upgrade to 2.2.1, all the commands > from 2.1.x.y will continue to work? I know that several readers have > used 2.2 for years with success. The commands will, but there may be better alternatives