... but every "eix-sync && emerge -avuD @world" finds me having to
re-edit /usr/portage/virtual/dev-manager/dev-manager-0.ebuild, or else
portage wants to emerge sys-apps/makedev and sys-fs/static-dev
Is there a way to 'force' portage to use the edited
dev-manager-0.ebuild and not the original version pulled in by
eix-sync?
Rgds,
--
FdS Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~
Â*• LOPSA Member #15248
Â*• Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
Â*• Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in/pepoluan
11-18-2011, 09:38 PM
Paul Colquhoun
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 06:33:59 PM Pandu Poluan wrote:
> So, any progress/updates on the attempt to replace udev with busybox's mdev?
>
> As for my case, it's working well on XenServer and VMware ESX /
> vSphere (haven't found the time to test a VirtualBox installation
> yet).
>
> Except for one annoyance:
>
> Now, I've done the steps put forth by waltdnes here:
>
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/user/242563
>
> ... but every "eix-sync && emerge -avuD @world" finds me having to
> re-edit /usr/portage/virtual/dev-manager/dev-manager-0.ebuild, or else
> portage wants to emerge sys-apps/makedev and sys-fs/static-dev
>
> Is there a way to 'force' portage to use the edited
> dev-manager-0.ebuild and not the original version pulled in by
> eix-sync?
>
> Rgds,
You can copy the ebuild to your own private overlay ( /usr/local/portage )
make your changes there, and bump the version number slightly.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes.
Then, when you do, you'll be a mile away, and you'll have their shoes.
11-18-2011, 10:53 PM
Neil Bothwick
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:38:42 +1100, Paul Colquhoun wrote:
> > ... but every "eix-sync && emerge -avuD @world" finds me having to
> > re-edit /usr/portage/virtual/dev-manager/dev-manager-0.ebuild, or else
> > portage wants to emerge sys-apps/makedev and sys-fs/static-dev
> >
> > Is there a way to 'force' portage to use the edited
> > dev-manager-0.ebuild and not the original version pulled in by
> > eix-sync?
> You can copy the ebuild to your own private overlay
> ( /usr/local/portage ) make your changes there, and bump the version
> number slightly.
No need to bump the version number, overlays take priority over the
standard tree when there are equal version numbers.
--
Neil Bothwick
This is the day for firm decisions! Or is it?
11-19-2011, 12:41 AM
Pandu Poluan
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Nov 19, 2011 6:56 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:38:42 +1100, Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>
> > > ... but every "eix-sync && emerge -avuD @world" finds me having to
> > > re-edit /usr/portage/virtual/dev-manager/dev-manager-0.ebuild, or else
> > > portage wants to emerge sys-apps/makedev and sys-fs/static-dev
> > >
> > > Is there a way to 'force' portage to use the edited
> > > dev-manager-0.ebuild and not the original version pulled in by
> > > eix-sync?
>
> > You can copy the ebuild to your own private overlay
> > ( /usr/local/portage ) make your changes there, and bump the version
> > number slightly.
>
> No need to bump the version number, overlays take priority over the
> standard tree when there are equal version numbers.
>
I knew I forgot something so simple >.<
Thanks!
Hmmm... so, @waltdnes, you should modify the procedure a bit, there...
Rgds,
11-19-2011, 03:55 AM
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 08:41:43AM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote
> On Nov 19, 2011 6:56 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:38:42 +1100, Paul Colquhoun wrote:
> >
> > > You can copy the ebuild to your own private overlay
> > > ( /usr/local/portage ) make your changes there, and bump the version
> > > number slightly.
> >
> > No need to bump the version number, overlays take priority over the
> > standard tree when there are equal version numbers.
> >
>
> I knew I forgot something so simple >.<
>
> Thanks!
>
> Hmmm... so, @waltdnes, you should modify the procedure a bit, there...
Will do. This is what beta tests are for <G>.
--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
11-19-2011, 04:21 AM
Pandu Poluan
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Nov 19, 2011 11:58 AM, <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 08:41:43AM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote
> > On Nov 19, 2011 6:56 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:38:42 +1100, Paul Colquhoun wrote:
> > >
> > > > You can copy the ebuild to your own private overlay
> > > > ( /usr/local/portage ) make your changes there, and bump the version
> > > > number slightly.
> > >
> > > No need to bump the version number, overlays take priority over the
> > > standard tree when there are equal version numbers.
> > >
> >
> > I knew I forgot something so simple >.<
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Hmmm... so, @waltdnes, you should modify the procedure a bit, there...
>
> *Will do. *This is what beta tests are for <G>.
>
Great! BTW, if the ebuild goes into overlay, it could use a newer EAPI, couldn't it?
If it could, then it'll solve the problem of busybox[mdev].
Rgds,
11-20-2011, 01:24 AM
Steven J Long
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
Pandu Poluan wrote:
> Great! BTW, if the ebuild goes into overlay, it could use a newer EAPI,
> couldn't it?
Sure.
--
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)
11-20-2011, 02:24 AM
Pandu Poluan
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Nov 19, 2011 11:58 AM, <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 08:41:43AM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote
> > On Nov 19, 2011 6:56 AM, "Neil Bothwick" <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 19 Nov 2011 09:38:42 +1100, Paul Colquhoun wrote:
> > >
> > > > You can copy the ebuild to your own private overlay
> > > > ( /usr/local/portage ) make your changes there, and bump the version
> > > > number slightly.
> > >
> > > No need to bump the version number, overlays take priority over the
> > > standard tree when there are equal version numbers.
> > >
> >
> > I knew I forgot something so simple >.<
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Hmmm... so, @waltdnes, you should modify the procedure a bit, there...
>
> *Will do. *This is what beta tests are for <G>.
>
While you're at it, you might want to check out how mdev handles hotplugging.
... but every "eix-sync&& emerge -avuD @world" finds me having to
re-edit /usr/portage/virtual/dev-manager/dev-manager-0.ebuild, or else
portage wants to emerge sys-apps/makedev and sys-fs/static-dev
Is there a way to 'force' portage to use the edited
dev-manager-0.ebuild and not the original version pulled in by
eix-sync?
Rgds,
Question: Is this going to be added to the shiney new Gentoo wiki at
some point? The wiki needs some more content for sure. ;-)
I didn't know if ya'll had thought of this before or not.
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
11-20-2011, 03:33 AM
Pandu Poluan
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
On Nov 20, 2011 10:56 AM, "Dale" <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>
>> So, any progress/updates on the attempt to replace udev with busybox's mdev?
>>
>> As for my case, it's working well on XenServer and VMware ESX /
>> vSphere (haven't found the time to test a VirtualBox installation
>> yet).
>>
>> Except for one annoyance:
>>
>> Now, I've done the steps put forth by waltdnes here:
>> ... but every "eix-sync&& *emerge -avuD @world" finds me having to
>>
>> re-edit /usr/portage/virtual/dev-manager/dev-manager-0.ebuild, or else
>> portage wants to emerge sys-apps/makedev and sys-fs/static-dev
>>
>> Is there a way to 'force' portage to use the edited
>> dev-manager-0.ebuild and not the original version pulled in by
>> eix-sync?
>>
>> Rgds,
>
>
>
> Question: *Is this going to be added to the shiney new Gentoo wiki at some point? *The wiki needs some more content for sure. *;-)
>
> I didn't know if ya'll had thought of this before or not.
>
Well, although I can't read @waltdnes' mind, I'm sure he has that in mind.
We're still ironing out the showstoppers. As soon as the generic glitches/annoyances (e.g., my 'fight' against portage reverting the .ebuild edits) are handled, I'm sure a w.g.o article will automagically appears ;-)
Progress on s/udev/mdev/
