Udev--171-r10 to be removed from Portage

Jaglover · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:37 am Post subject:

Since you do not use it switching to eudev could solve your problem.
_________________
My Gentoo installation notes.
Please learn how to denote units correctly!

NeddySeagoon · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:40 am Post subject:

BitJam,

Its interestiing that updating a package you do not use breaks stuff.
That contradiction says that you do use it but you don't know it.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.

Jaglover · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:48 am Post subject:

I was thinking what NeddySeagoon said. But virtual lets you choose between udev and eudev, static-dev is not a choice. How exactly are you not using udev?
_________________
My Gentoo installation notes.
Please learn how to denote units correctly!

BitJam · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:29 am Post subject:

I don't start the udev service. I use mdev from busybox instead. I did this before the other udev alternatives started to appear. I've done a lot of LiveCD/USB development and I am very comfortable and happy with busybox and mdev. It's 10x times faster than udev and is problem-free. Udev came to my attention in a negative light when it was pausing 10 seconds or more (up to minutes) when I was booting live iso's in Virtual Box. Mdev had already run from /init with no problems. I could see the writing on the wall.

My solution in Gentoo (which is probably not optimal) was to mask versions of udev higher than the one I have installed. That way packages that wanted me to have udev installed were happy.

Part of the recent udev breakage was with hal (gasp) which I have installed so I can watch Amazon Prime videos. Upgrading to the more recent udev broke hal. Downgrading back to the older version fixed it. Others have had no conflict between hal and the newer udev but I didn't want to deal with having to debug this problem. Again, this breakage occurred when the udev service was not running.

Perhaps I haven't given this udev stuff enough attention but it seems to have been a constant source of problems and breakage for the last year or more. This is what drove me to use mdev. I wanted to get away from all of that nonsense.

Ideally, I would like to have udev installed so I can use it occasionally when I want to access usb devices in Virtual Box. I strongly object to the gigantic pain udev has become. Perhaps my strategy to try to minimize this pain has backfired.

There are a very few packages (just udev and nvidia-drivers, AFAIK) where IMO it is helpful to leave older versions in Portage. ISTM Gentoo is not supposed to be "one size fits all".

I have a /usr/local/portage and know how to use it so I can deal with this on my own. One of the reasons I'm posting this is because maybe I'm going down a blind alley and there is a better approach I should take. I wrote my original post as an email to the maintainer but I decided it would be better for me to post it here.

SamuliSuominen · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:48 am Post subject:

Dragonlord · Guru Joined: 22 Aug 2004 Posts: 446 Location: Switzerland

Same complaint here. Why removing a stable and working UDev version that packages still require to build while a broken >197 version is out in the wild causing problems left and right and not doing what is advertized (static and predictable network interfaces? nope, not working as advertized). Leave at least the last properly working UDev version (171) in portage. Everything else is just bitch-slaping GenToo users left and right just because you can.
_________________
DragonDreams: Leader and Head Programmer

SamuliSuominen · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:55 pm Post subject:

SamuliSuominen · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:01 pm Post subject:

Dragonlord · Guru Joined: 22 Aug 2004 Posts: 446 Location: Switzerland

SamuliSuominen · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:11 pm Post subject:

BitJam · Posted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:58 pm Post subject:

libertytrek · Apprentice Joined: 18 Jul 2007 Posts: 258

Posted to the gentoo-user list, but maybe there are people here who aren't on the list...

Ok, I sync'd this morning, and now see the warning about udev 171-r10 being masked, so I guess it is time..

I know this was discussed quite a bit a few months ago, but just to refresh my memory...

My question is, if I am currently running 171-r10 on my server, and I have a separate lvm managed /usr partition, is it now safe to comment out my udev masks and update udev, with a reasonable expectation that doing so won't break my boot ability?

Also, should I manually fix the blockers:

> [blocks B ] sys-apps/module-init-tools ("sys-apps/module-init-tools" is blocking sys-apps/kmod-12-r1)
> [blocks B ] sys-apps/kmod ("sys-apps/kmod" is blocking sys-apps/module-init-tools-3.16-r2)

by doing "emerge -C module-init-tools && emerge kmod" *before* upgrading udev? Or does it matter?

Thanks...

krinn · Watchman Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470

BitJam · Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:45 pm Post subject:

@krinn, a third alternative is to copy udev-171 to /usr/local/portage then bump the -r number and install it. You get to keep the working udev but not get bothered by the remove from tree nonsense. This is what I did. Also, a fourth alternative is to use mdev from busybox. This is a no-frills way to go. Almost every Linux LiveCD uses this. Slashbeast offers this guide: mdev like a boss that makes the transition rather painless and offers you a few frills as well.

krinn · Watchman Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470

thanks BitJam for the link, i of course already copy it to my local overlay, but that would just gave me a few more months (as soon or later kernel and tools will cry against that version).
Will keep that mdev doc as potential solve.

MoonWalker · Guru Joined: 04 Jul 2002 Posts: 510

So where do we find a simple and clear How To that can guide us step by step through the necessary steps to take changing from e.g. udev-171 to udev-198, including changes that need to be done in the net script(s) etc.? I manage my server remotely and only have 1 try. If it fails I have to jump in the car and drive quite some distance and now it's snowing heavily outside...

Not all of us sleeps with our Gentoo under the pillow, even if we love it, but just attend to it when needed. A simple and clear How To would most likely mean "end of story" for me (and probably most).
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.

verbit · n00b Joined: 18 Mar 2013 Posts: 1

Let me explain how I feel about udev (I suppose this
feeling is shared by many Gentoo users). I did not
know anything about this program, and did not care, until
it completely broke my system after an inadvertent update.
I was in a middle of a visit in a foreign city, in a hotel,
did a random update, and suddenly my computer was
giving me kernel panic instead of reboot. It turned
out that my kernel was not up to date. It's hard to deal
with this kind of emergency in a middle of nowhere, with
no access to Internet.

Of course I was careless, but before this
happened, I owned several laptops with Gentoo,
and never had any major breakage for many years.

Since then, I just mask a new version of udev
as soon as it appears. The benefits of a new version
of udev are rather slim, and possibility of a complete
breakage is almost sure. In fact, every single upgrade
of udev causes major problems for a big percentage
of users.

This is rather typical, and udev maintainers
seem to insist on breaking the system for anybody
who is not using their own setup.

Udev is a single most problematic and unpleasant
thing about Gentoo (and Linux) right now.

Now I copied everything with portage overlay,
but I shudder to think that I would have to do the same
for every laptop I own.

The devs created loads of trouble for everybody who
does not want to upgrade, for no clear benefit even
to themselves.

BitJam · Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:18 pm Post subject:

Welcome verbit. You are far from alone in your feelings about udev on Gentoo. There are many long anti-udev rants on the forums (or at least there used to be).

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIzMDU

The Doctor · Moderator Joined: 27 Jul 2010 Posts: 2678

Anon-E-moose · Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:43 pm Post subject:

kurly · Apprentice Joined: 02 Apr 2012 Posts: 260

BitJam · Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:17 am Post subject:

Be careful! It may be contagious.

The Doctor · Moderator Joined: 27 Jul 2010 Posts: 2678

As I understand it, what eudev has that udev does not is support for older kernels and is built over an older release. The things like separate /usr support have been patched back into udev so the practical difference is not that great. It certainly isn't upstream supporting separate /usr and such. They specifically drooped that support. I think it would be rather its rather rich to blame the devs for upstream trying to force systemd on the world. Whether we like it or not, udev has become a critical component of most desktop environments.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.

SamuliSuominen · Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:18 am Post subject: