| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:55 pm Post subject: [SOLVED] what is pulling in udev-init-scripts? |
 |
|
Hi,
I have to do some masking for newer udev (>=162) which dropped support hd* disks device names , I have a disk 25 such partitions and do not want to reorganise all that and the headaches it would entail.
Now for some odd reason something is trying to pull in udev-init-scripts which in turn wants recent udev:
| Code: | sys-fs/udev:0
(sys-fs/udev-182-r3::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
>=sys-fs/udev-182 required by (sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-10::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
(and 3 more with the same problem)
(sys-fs/udev-151-r4::gentoo, installed) pulled in by
>=sys-fs/udev-145[extras] required by (gnome-base/gvfs-1.6.7-r1::gentoo, installed)
>=sys-fs/udev-145[extras] required by (xfce-extra/thunar-volman-0.6.0::gentoo, installed)
<sys-fs/udev-171[extras] required by (sys-power/upower-0.9.16::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
(and 2 more with the same problems)
|
| Code: | equery d sys-fs/udev-init-scripts
[ Searching for packages depending on sys-fs/udev-init-scripts... ]
bash-4.2# |
So if it's not installed and nothing depends on it why is portage trying to pull it in ??
TIA Gentree 
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86
Last edited by Gentree on Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:01 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
in case the answer is the same oddity what is trying to update my linux-headers?
| Code: |
etcat linux-headers
[ Searching for package 'linux-headers' in all categories among: ]
* installed packages
[I--] [ ~] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.32 (0)
* Portage tree (/usr/portage/new)
[-P-] [ ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.4.33.3 (0)
[-P-] [ ~] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.4.36 (0)
[-P-] [M ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.1 (0)
[-P-] [M~] sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.2-r1 (0)
[-P-] [M~] sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.3 (0)
[-P-] [M~] sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.4 (0)
|
| Code: | equery d linux-headers
[ Searching for packages depending on linux-headers... ]
app-emulation/wine-1.3.29 (!win64 & amd64? >=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6)
(win32&amd64? >=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6)
dev-util/strace-4.5.20-r2 (sys-kernel/linux-headers)
media-gfx/sane-backends-1.0.22-r2 (v4l? sys-kernel/linux-headers)
media-libs/libv4l-0.8.6 (>=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.30-r1)
media-video/ffmpeg-0.10.3 (v4l? sys-kernel/linux-headers)
media-video/transcode-1.1.7 (v4l? >=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.11)
media-video/vlc-2.0.1 (fbosd? sys-kernel/linux-headers)
net-dialup/rp-pppoe-3.10-r1 (<sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.24)
(>=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.25)
net-misc/ifenslave-1.1.0-r5 (>=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.4.22)
sys-libs/libcap-2.22 (sys-kernel/linux-headers)
sys-libs/libcap-ng-0.6.6 (sys-kernel/linux-headers)
virtual/os-headers-0 (kernel_linux? sys-kernel/linux-headers:0)
x11-drivers/xf86-input-evdev-2.6.0 (>=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6)
|
Now I don't see anything needer the newer 3.4 headers and it certainly is not what I require when running a 2.6.32 kernel !
The ebuild exists (in overlay) and emerge finds there is one.
| Code: |
emp linux-headers
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild R ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.32 [2.6.32] |
So again, what's the jive with pulling in 3.4 ?!
thx
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What is up with portage these days !?
I just ran emerge -uD world and amongst the output I find:
| Code: | | [ebuild U ] app-editors/ghex-3.4.1 [3.0.0] |
Now I just explicitly masked that as part of avoiding all the gnome 3.4 stuff. Indeed, if I check explicitly:
| Code: | etcat ghex
[ Searching for package 'ghex' in all categories among: ]
* installed packages
[I--] [ ~] app-editors/ghex-3.0.0 (2)
* Portage tree (/usr/portage/new)
[-P-] [ ] app-editors/ghex-2.24.0 (2)
[-P-] [M~] app-editors/ghex-3.4.1 (2)
emp ghex
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild R ] app-editors/ghex-3.0.0 |
[BTW etcat and emp are aliases]
| Code: |
a etcat emp
alias etcat='equery list -p '\''[] ()'\'' '
alias emp='emerge -p ' |
These three posts are in a way unrelated but my guess is it's the same problem.
[EDIT]
>3.4 is explicitly masked
| Code: |
grep ghex /etc/portage/package.mask
>=app-editors/ghex-3.4
|
See above how it still wanted to pull it in.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86
Last edited by Gentree on Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:37 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Veteran
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:44 pm Post subject: Re: what is pulling in udev-init-scripts? |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | I have to do some masking for newer udev (>=162) which dropped support hd* disks device names. Now for some odd reason something is trying to pull in udev-init-scripts which in turn wants recent udev [...] |
Somewhat of a guess .. the arch udev is 171, you have >=162 masked, gvfs will be updated to 1.10.1 which requires >164 ... somewhere in this mix is the 'gudev' useflag for udev which (guess) your udev doesn't provide but is a required use for updating other package(s) (gvfs with the 'udev' useflag perhaps) ... so it can't provide for the mask and the required use at the same time, and so it errors telling you what would be required? You didn't post the entire command/output and I'm not sure what its the result of, but I would have expected that I'd made some fuss about requiring >164 ... again, I'm guessing, so you can take the above with a grain of salt.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks,
no, I have had to mask a few package versions that give that kind of problem and put a few entries in package.use
eg:
gnome-base/gvfs -udev # shut the fuck up about udev !
The whole xfce / thunar set up was a real PITA but I don't use xfce any more so I just turned off things that were being a pain. It did not seem like the deps were consistent but there again not much of this mess does.
Portage seems to be making quite mess of things right now. Like it seems want to pull in a version of ghex that is explicitly masked when I do world but if I just do ghex it gets it right.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VoidMage
Advocate
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
Posts: 4836
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I realy don't see what the problem here is.
libata drivers are just fine with 25 partitions...
provided you've got right kernel settings..
Also, >=ghex 3.0 have very little to do with gnome 3, short of dconf and gtk3. In fact, far les to do with Gnome than previous versions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the problem here is not _why_ I have chosen to mask some packages but why portage is making such an incoherent mess of following its own rules.
to take the ghex example why does emerge -uD world try to merge 3.4.1 when I have explicitly masked it ?
Yet emerge ghex on its own and I correctly get 3.0.0
Now unless I'm missing something obvious (and it's not been so obvious that anyone else has picked it up) there is a significant problem with portage being borked here.
something is pulling udev-init-scripts yet it is not installed and nothing depends on it !
Again, to my understanding of portage that should not be happening.
thanks for any help you can give in understanding what is going wrong here.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Advocate
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 3677
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Code: | equery d udev-init-scripts
* These packages depend on udev-init-scripts:
sys-fs/udev-182-r2 (openrc ? >=sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-10)
|
so the openrc use flag pull it. Just your answer you were looking for, not the explain why/when/who...
oh and i would add :
sd* naming change DISKS naming convention from hd* to sd* this in no way change disk partitions naming scheme.
So your problem is changing "h"d* to "s"d*.
I admit it could be a pain to handle 15 disks naming change, but 15 partitions is easy as only one letter change. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | Code: | equery d udev-init-scripts
* These packages depend on udev-init-scripts:
sys-fs/udev-182-r2 (openrc ? >=sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-10)
|
so the openrc use flag pull it. Just your answer you were looking for, not the explain why/when/who...
|
Thanks but you will note in the very first post here that I ran just command on the system in question and got a null response.
What you post comes from your system with udev-182 , not this system with udev-151.
I've just double checked and that is indeed as I stated, there are no packages installed that claim to depend on it.
I ran eupdatedb yesterday but I thought I ought to check again:
| Code: |
bash-4.2#eupdatedb
bash: /usr/sbin/eupdatedb: No such file or directory |
WHAT?!
This mess gets worse the more I look at it.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Advocate
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 3677
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: |
Thanks but you will note in the very first post here that I ran just command on the system in question and got a null response.
What you post comes from your system with udev-182 , not this system with udev-151.
|
Hence why i'll show you the output with it install, equery fail to answer to anything not install in your system. That's why you get null response. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VoidMage
Advocate
Joined: 14 Oct 2006
Posts: 4836
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just to clarify: if your reason for staying with CONFIG_IDE drivers was that you needed those 25 partitions, then you've got it wrong.
There is a kernel setting, that allows that many partitions under CONFIG_ATA drivers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | Gentree wrote: |
Thanks but you will note in the very first post here that I ran just command on the system in question and got a null response.
What you post comes from your system with udev-182 , not this system with udev-151.
|
Hence why i'll show you the output with it install, equery fail to answer to anything not install in your system. That's why you get null response. |
Thanks Krinn but I don't understand what you are trying to say here.
Of course equery will not give dependencies for something that is not on my system : that the whole point !
equery gives a null respons. That means there is nothing on my system that requires udev-init-scripts . It's that simple. So why is emerge trying to pull it in.
That is where I started this thread and I have not got any nearer to understanding what is broken and how to fix it.
@Void, thanks I am aware of that. when it first came into the kernel it was limited to 15 partitions but that was fixed quite a while ago now.
My problem here is not hd vs sd but the fact that my package management system seems completely screwed.
Thanks for your comments.
BTW a reboot got eupdatedb working again, udev-init-scripts problem remains as stated.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Veteran
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 1307
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gentree wrote: | | equery gives a null respons. That means there is nothing on my system that requires udev-init-scripts . It's that simple. So why is emerge trying to pull it in. |
Gentree ... there maybe nothing currently on your system requiring it, but something in the list of packages to be installed has it as a (x ? sys-fs/udev-init-scripts). You can mask a package but other packages will continue to 'require', or 'use', mask doesn't effect other packages requirements. This seems to be the problem, but without the list of masks and the output from --update its hard to see what exactly.
I don't think portage is broken, its trying to find an upgrade path that is perhaps hampered by your masks and the packages 'use'. The most obvious solution is to remove the masks and 'emerge -pv', the list should provide some idea of what the non-masked upgrade path would be, and what dependencies are pulled in via use. You can then trace the changes required in mask/use to keep you at udev <162 (that is, if something isn't critical to the upgrade of other packages).
I am somewhat confused by the fact the gvfs update requires a version of udev above the version you currently have masked, and this didn't show as being required, but perhaps this was in the output you had truncated, anyhow, you may have some difficulties with sticking at the version of udev you currently have installled and updating packages ... because, at least in the case of gvfs, the minimum version required with the 'udev' use is 164-r2.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just reviewing my original post I realise my question was mislead by believing the portage output.
[quote]Now for some odd reason something is trying to pull in udev-init-scripts which in turn wants recent udev:
| Code: | sys-fs/udev:0
(sys-fs/udev-182-r3::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge) pulled in by
>=sys-fs/udev-182 required by (sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-10::gentoo, ebuild scheduled for merge)
(and 3 more with the same p[/quote]roblem) |
which was why is was confused about what krinn replied with. (thanks)
As krinn points out it is recent udev (with openrc in USE) that is requiring udev-init-scripts, not the other way around as reported by portage.
I have since found that it was newest polkit that was requiring the later udev so masking that seems to have fixed the blockages.
Still a bundle of other stuff to fix before this starts behaving properly again....
Thanks all.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gentree
Watchman
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Posts: 5164
Location: France, Old Europe
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2012 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Finally it seems that it was wpa-supplicant that was pulling in crda that was the cause of the later udev dependency, though it took a lot of digging to find it.
masking the offending version of crda got rid of the problem.
Thanks for the help.
_________________
Linux, because I'd rather own a free OS than steal one that's not worth paying for.
KX7-333 , AthlonXP1800+ @2.3GHz
AthlonXP-M on A7N8X @ 2.6/2.4GHz (winter/summer)
2.6.32-hh1 : portage ~x86 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
