Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Announce: just another one udev fork
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 12, 13, 14  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
miroR
Guru
Guru


Joined: 05 Mar 2008
Posts: 359

PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
miroR wrote:
khayyam wrote:
miroR ... this just looks to me as though you have installed udev-standalone but haven't installed the udev-init-scripts also from the udev overlay. So, gentoo's init scripts are looking for /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd which of course udev-standalone doesn't have.

But no, see this:
Code:
sysresccd / # emerge -pvt udev-init-scripts

These are the packages that would be merged, in reverse order:

Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild   R    ] sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-16::udev [16::gentoo] 0 kB

Yes, exactly as I stated, the version you have installed is sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-16::gentoo, which would be replaced by sys-fs/udev-init-scripts-16::udev. So, the wrong package.

Now, assuming the above revdep-rebuild was successful, replacing udev-init-scripts should be all thats needed.

Point of order: please try to focus your report into something that is parsable, and please try to focus on the issue and not digress into all manner of observations. It would also help if you made one succinct post rather than a whole chain of posts, that is, less noise more signal.

best ... khay

I'll try to compy, captain!
I did reinstall udev-init-scripts. It is now ::udev, not anymore ::gentoo.
Subsequent emerge --depclean showed no redundant packaged.
But revdep-rebuild did go for reinstalling the same three packages as in both (there were two I think) previous runs upon other tries at fixing this issue of mine. sys-fs/lvm2, x11-base/xorg-server (both apparently reinstalled fine) and sys-fs/udisks.
The latter, sys-fs/udisks, didn't go past an obstacle similar to the second of the two obstacles it previously encountered in two separate tries at reinstall, that is, this third try:
/var/log/portage_logs/sys-fs:udisks-1.0.4-r3:20120917-115958.log:
http://pastebin.mozilla.org/1827170
emerge --info is as in the link already given above:
http://pastebin.mozilla.org/?dl=1826225
emerge -pqv '=sys-fs/udisks is also unchaned from above.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
miroR
Guru
Guru


Joined: 05 Mar 2008
Posts: 359

PostPosted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

However, my system in question booted!
I got all back, www, devices, shiny Gentoo as always.
Thanks, and really sorry for my old man's incumbering ways!
If any more info is possibly needed form me (such as if sys-fs:udisks finally installed, I'll keep an eye on this thread for a while.
Cheers! Thanks again!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

grey_d0t, consus, et al ...

I just noticed the following. If kmod is built with the lzma useflag we get:

Code:
# ldd /sbin/udevd
** /sbin/udevd
    linux-gate.so.1 (0xb77a6000)
    libblkid.so.1 => /lib/libblkid.so.1 (0xb776f000)
    libkmod.so.2 => /lib/libkmod.so.2 (0xb775a000)
    librt.so.1 => /lib/librt.so.1 (0xb7751000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb75c9000)
    libuuid.so.1 => /lib/libuuid.so.1 (0xb75c3000)
    liblzma.so.5 => /usr/lib/liblzma.so.5 (0xb75a0000)
    libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb758b000)
    libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb7571000)
    /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb77a7000)
# equery belongs /usr/lib/liblzma.so.5
app-arch/xz-utils-5.0.4 (/usr/lib/liblzma.so.5.0.4)
app-arch/xz-utils-5.0.4 (/usr/lib/liblzma.so.5 -> liblzma.so.5.0.4)

This is basically due to kmod linking to liblzma ...
Code:
# ldd /sbin/kmod
** /sbin/kmod
    linux-gate.so.1 (0xb773e000)
    libkmod.so.2 => /lib/libkmod.so.2 (0xb7716000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb758e000)
    liblzma.so.5 => /usr/lib/liblzma.so.5 (0xb756b000)
    libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb7556000)
    /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb773f000)
    libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb753b000)

So, we need to either provide an ebuild for xz-utils that installs to /lib or use.mask the lzma use on kmod. Well, I haven't given it too much thought as I just discovered the above, so there may be some other solution here.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:

So, we need to either provide an ebuild for xz-utils that installs to /lib


done.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LiamOS
n00b
n00b


Joined: 06 Jun 2012
Posts: 56
Location: Kerry/Dublin, Ireland

PostPosted: Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks very much for the fork!

I'll get started using it tomorrow and see what happens. :)
_________________
CFLAGS=" -O999999"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 2:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

grey_dot wrote:
khayyam wrote:

So, we need to either provide an ebuild for xz-utils that installs to /lib

done.

grey_dot ...

that fixes it, and so, with app-arch/xz-utils-5.0.4::udev, and the lzma useflag on sys-apps/kmod-10::udev

Code:
# ldd /sbin/udevd
   linux-gate.so.1 (0xb77dc000)
   libblkid.so.1 => /lib/libblkid.so.1 (0xb77a5000)
   libkmod.so.2 => /lib/libkmod.so.2 (0xb7790000)
   librt.so.1 => /lib/librt.so.1 (0xb7787000)
   libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb75ff000)
   libuuid.so.1 => /lib/libuuid.so.1 (0xb75f9000)
   liblzma.so.5 => /lib/liblzma.so.5 (0xb75d6000)
   libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb75c1000)
   libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb75a7000)
   /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb77dd000)

Is it now worth thinking about a (package) name change? Currently virtual/dev-manager-0 consists of the following:

sys-fs/udev
sys-apps/busybox[mdev]
sys-fs/devfsd
sys-fs/static-dev
sys-freebsd/freebsd-sbin

... and of course 'udev-standalone' could also provide that virtual, at least if the package was renamed.

At the Gentoo Council Meeting, April 2012, it was voted 5 to 1 in favour of separate /usr as a supported configuration, and there has been much said in other threads, mailing lists, etc, about the issue, sometimes with the refrain "well, if nobody is willing to fork udev then we will just have to accept upstreams decisions" (not a direct quote, but close enough), so I think the question should be raised now (well, perhaps a number of questions).

1. Firstly, should a bug be opened, and are there any devs who are perhaps reading that might care to comment, and/or have any suggestions as to the issues involved here?
2. Can 'udev-standalone' (or whatever name it might go under) be stablised code wise in order that a release could be made? Not that whats currently in git is necessarily unstable, but more in terms of point releases that can be in portage long enough to get user tested.
3. Besides kmod, and xz-utils what other packages and/or issues need to be accounted for? ie: is seperate /var an issue? I remember a discussion sometime back re alsa being called by udev and expecting /var mounted for a pid or some such, are there other issues that need to be addressed?
[probably more]

I'm not attempting to become a self-appointed spokesman or anything, I just know that these things can take time to work their way into portage, so its more an issue of trying to get/keep the ball rolling and gather momentum, and thats the only reason I feel it worth posing these questions (and no doubt others) now.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hcaulfield57
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:
I remember a discussion sometime back re alsa being called by udev and expecting /var mounted for a pid or some such, are there other issues that need to be addressed?

Just a note, because you mentioned alsa. I currently have separate /usr and separate /var, and when udev gets started it complains about not being able to find /usr/bin/alsactl. I believe that it is trying to reset my volumes, which does not work because /usr is not mounted yet. This is not a big deal, because I just set up the alsa script to start in 'default' runlevel after /usr is mounted and my volumes work correctly. There is no reason that alsactl needs to be in /bin, for issues like this changing the script is all that's necessary. Overall, the issues have been minor for my setup, and this is a very non-invasive change. I'm very pleased with the udev-fork and would like to see it something officially sponsored by Gentoo, perhaps other distros will take it up as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
khayyam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 2244

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hcaulfield57 wrote:
Just a note, because you mentioned alsa. I currently have separate /usr and separate /var, and when udev gets started it complains about not being able to find /usr/bin/alsactl.

hcaulfield57 ... ok, my problem is I don't have a seperate /usr (or /var) and so I'm less likely to encounter these minor issues, a list of problem packages is useful here, and though media-sound/alsa-utils (alsactl) is not essencial to boot it may be possible to fix such things via the init script.

hcaulfield57 wrote:
Overall, the issues have been minor for my setup, and this is a very non-invasive change. I'm very pleased with the udev-fork and would like to see it something officially sponsored by Gentoo, perhaps other distros will take it up as well.

Personally, I've had no issues at all. My setup is such that I could quite easily drop udev entirely and, with some minor changes here and there, still have a functioning system, but when I read: "udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely" (Lennart Poettering, Aug 2012), the issue becomes less about udev itself and more and more about a coup de main of init, and that I certainly do not want to see. Some two years prior (LKML, May 2010), Lennart Poettering stated "systemd certainly won't require an initrd or anything else equally intrusive", but from my perspective, this is entrirely disengenious as systemd is the intrusion if something as pervasive as udev is unsupported on anything but systemd.

So, yes, I likewise want to see Gentoo buck this whole trend, but as systemd is becoming more and more a requirement, rather than an option (particularly when it comes to the lovelyishious offerings of the desktop) then it really needs to be addressed quickly and throughly, as otherwise it will be on us, and there will be nothing that can be done about it.

best ... khay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hcaulfield57 wrote:
khayyam wrote:
I remember a discussion sometime back re alsa being called by udev and expecting /var mounted for a pid or some such, are there other issues that need to be addressed?

Just a note, because you mentioned alsa. I currently have separate /usr and separate /var, and when udev gets started it complains about not being able to find /usr/bin/alsactl. I believe that it is trying to reset my volumes, which does not work because /usr is not mounted yet. This is not a big deal, because I just set up the alsa script to start in 'default' runlevel after /usr is mounted and my volumes work correctly. There is no reason that alsactl needs to be in /bin, for issues like this changing the script is all that's necessary. Overall, the issues have been minor for my setup, and this is a very non-invasive change. I'm very pleased with the udev-fork and would like to see it something officially sponsored by Gentoo, perhaps other distros will take it up as well.


That's because of /lib/udev/rules.d/90-alsa-restore.rules which is brought by alsa. Basically, this is not needed during boot because /etc/init.d/alsa does the same. This rule is only necessary if you have hotplugable sound cards. We'll try to fix this issue in the near future so that the rule will be postponed until the necessary binaries become available.

p.s. there is WAIT_FOR udev rule, but it doesn't work the way we want it to :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

grey_dot wrote:
hcaulfield57 wrote:
khayyam wrote:
I remember a discussion sometime back re alsa being called by udev and expecting /var mounted for a pid or some such, are there other issues that need to be addressed?

Just a note, because you mentioned alsa. I currently have separate /usr and separate /var, and when udev gets started it complains about not being able to find /usr/bin/alsactl. I believe that it is trying to reset my volumes, which does not work because /usr is not mounted yet. This is not a big deal, because I just set up the alsa script to start in 'default' runlevel after /usr is mounted and my volumes work correctly. There is no reason that alsactl needs to be in /bin, for issues like this changing the script is all that's necessary. Overall, the issues have been minor for my setup, and this is a very non-invasive change. I'm very pleased with the udev-fork and would like to see it something officially sponsored by Gentoo, perhaps other distros will take it up as well.


That's because of /lib/udev/rules.d/90-alsa-restore.rules which is brought by alsa. Basically, this is not needed during boot because /etc/init.d/alsa does the same. This rule is only required if you have hotplugable sound cards. We'll try to fix this issue in the near future so that the rule will be postponed until the necessary binaries become available.

p.s. there is WAIT_FOR udev rule, but it doesn't work the way we want it to :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hcaulfield57
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khayyam wrote:

Personally, I've had no issues at all. My setup is such that I could quite easily drop udev entirely and, with some minor changes here and there, still have a functioning system,

Yes, my setup is similar, I have mdev working properly on another installation of mine (LFS), it works with no problems, everything else works properly with it. Really udev is unnecessary for many systems, and even static /dev works well. This is a desktop, for servers it's very simple to drop udev if you don't rely on something like LVM.

khayyam wrote:

but when I read: "udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely" (Lennart Poettering, Aug 2012), the issue becomes less about udev itself and more and more about a coup de main of init, and that I certainly do not want to see. Some two years prior (LKML, May 2010), Lennart Poettering stated "systemd certainly won't require an initrd or anything else equally intrusive", but from my perspective, this is entrirely disengenious as systemd is the intrusion if something as pervasive as udev is unsupported on anything but systemd.

So, yes, I likewise want to see Gentoo buck this whole trend, but as systemd is becoming more and more a requirement, rather than an option (particularly when it comes to the lovelyishious offerings of the desktop) then it really needs to be addressed quickly and throughly, as otherwise it will be on us, and there will be nothing that can be done about it.

I'm absolutely in agreement with you here, I do not want systemd to take over Linux and become the init system that everyone has to use. And for people who do rely on udev they need an alternative to have working systems. Also, once people depend on systemd, who knows what other whims of its developers they will be forced to follow. My guess is that the Gentoo devs are taking a 'wait and see' approach, and will evaluate the best solution once it is no longer possible to build/run udev outside of systemd, which who knows may be tomorrow or a year from now. However, I would like to see this fork get a more official status within Gentoo, and I know other distros will appreciate this.

I hope to be able to help however I can as well, I'm not a programmer, but at the very least I can test this fork.

grey_dot wrote:

That's because of /lib/udev/rules.d/90-alsa-restore.rules which is brought by alsa. Basically, this is not needed during boot because /etc/init.d/alsa does the same. This rule is only necessary if you have hotplugable sound cards. We'll try to fix this issue in the near future so that the rule will be postponed until the necessary binaries become available.

p.s. there is WAIT_FOR udev rule, but it doesn't work the way we want it to :)

Okay thanks grey_dot, and don't feel like this is a pressing issue, it's relatively minor, I just brought it up as an example of something that breaks with separate /usr, it's probably not even udev's fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 166

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm really looking forward to this fork, just trying it out now.
_________________
https://cosmofox.net/nyx
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For those of you who are still interested, release 190 is out. All major upstream changes are ported as usual, since there was only one there - btrfs raid hotplug support.

Among other things, thanks to consus whos lazy ass I have to kick all the time, we replaced gtk-doc with doxygen, which removes some ugly build-time hacks.

You also should update udev-init-scripts to version 16-r1, since udevd was moved to /sbin in this release. Please, do not forget to report all issues you encounter. Have fun :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hcaulfield57
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

grey_dot wrote:
For those of you who are still interested, release 190 is out.


I updated right away. Everything seems to be working well. Keep up the good work!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1468

PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the fork. So far its working very nicely on my hardened desktop.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 166

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So far, everything is working, nice! But I get this on shutdowns:
Quote:
udevd: IMPORT{builtin}: 'btrfs ready $devnode' unknown /lib64/udev/rules.d/64-btrfs.rules:8

_________________
https://cosmofox.net/nyx
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

olek wrote:
So far, everything is working, nice! But I get this on shutdowns:
Quote:
udevd: IMPORT{builtin}: 'btrfs ready $devnode' unknown /lib64/udev/rules.d/64-btrfs.rules:8


Do you have btrfs-progs installed?


Last edited by grey_dot on Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:50 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 166

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

you mean btrfs-progs? yes: sys-fs/btrfs-progs-0.19.11
_________________
https://cosmofox.net/nyx
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

olek wrote:
you mean btrfs-progs? yes: sys-fs/btrfs-progs-0.19.11


Yeah. Any btrfs partitions present?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

olek wrote:
you mean btrfs-progs? yes: sys-fs/btrfs-progs-0.19.11


Yeah. Any btrfs partitions present?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
olek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 166

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

currently not. There isn't even the module loaded currently. I once just played around with the tools, but each partition has been deleted.
_________________
https://cosmofox.net/nyx
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grey_dot
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 15 Jul 2012
Posts: 142

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

olek wrote:
currently not. There isn't even the module loaded currently.


That might be the case. Ok, thanks for the report :)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theBlackDragon
l33t
l33t


Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 757
Location: Gent (Belgium)

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mv wrote:
I was hoping for this since Lennart admitted that the originally claimed reasons for the merge were just marketing lies with the actual purpose to force users into systemd (which was of course not a surprising opening; only surprise was that Lennart admitted it in a sense.)


Slightly OT, but do you have any links for this? While I wouldn't be surprised at all Google seems to come up blank (at least, insofar Lennart himself stating this).

More on-topic. YAY! Keep up the good work! :)
_________________
Fvwm|Fvwm forum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hcaulfield57
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 148

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

theBlackDragon wrote:

Slightly OT, but do you have any links for this? While I wouldn't be surprised at all Google seems to come up blank (at least, insofar Lennart himself stating this).


http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7126118.html#7126118
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
theBlackDragon
l33t
l33t


Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 757
Location: Gent (Belgium)

PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hcaulfield57 wrote:
theBlackDragon wrote:

Slightly OT, but do you have any links for this? While I wouldn't be surprised at all Google seems to come up blank (at least, insofar Lennart himself stating this).


http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7126118.html#7126118


Oh right, I read that. I just interpreted that remark as him having literally said as much (though I guess that quote isn't all that far off)
_________________
Fvwm|Fvwm forum
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 12, 13, 14  Next
Page 6 of 14

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum