Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Udev--171-r10 to be removed from Portage
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:34 am    Post subject: Udev--171-r10 to be removed from Portage Reply with quote

emerge wrote:
!!! The following installed packages are masked:
- sys-fs/udev-171-r10::local (masked by: package.mask)
/usr/portage/profiles/package.mask:
# Samuli Suominen <XXXXXXXXXXXXXX> (07 Mar 2013)
# Remove redudant version of udev now that 197-r8 will
# work down to Linux 2.6.32.60 on most arches.
# Removal in 90 days.

I don't use udev but for reasons I don't understand it needs to be installed on my system due to Gentoo dependencies. I have version 171-r10 installed which works just fine especially since I don't use it. I tried upgrading to 197-r8 but that caused extreme breakage. I trust that I could wade in and figure out all the changes I need to make but this is needless work for me because I DON'T USE IT.

Since many people seem to be breaking away from udev and since udev seems to be required for Gentoo to be happy, wouldn't it make sense to leave a few older versions around during the turmoil?

It seems that every month or so a drastic change to udev is made which causes major breakage. I realize this is supposed to make life better for everyone sometime in the future but I ask you to cut us a break and be slightly less severe in the here and now.

Edit: removed email address.


Last edited by BitJam on Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:30 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaglover
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 4730
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Since you do not use it switching to eudev could solve your problem.
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 32295
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaglover
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 4730
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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?
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2133
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jaglover wrote:
Since you do not use it switching to eudev could solve your problem.


No, currently eudev doesn't solve anything. It's something you might use if you want to contribute to make it useful, but nothing to be recommended for any user since there is currently no gain.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dragonlord
Guru
Guru


Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 350
Location: Switzerland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
Leader and Head Programmer: Epsylon, Drag[en]gine and others
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2133
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dragonlord wrote:
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.


Here you are again, same old story from:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7244424-highlight-.html#7244424
http://forums.gentoo.org/search.php?search_author=Dragonlord

It's working exactly as documented and now 198 is defaulting to the new predictable network naming which is the end of this story.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2133
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BitJam wrote:

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.


This sounds like you should just copy libhal.so.0 (or whatever it was called again) and libudev.so.0 to /usr/local/lib/ and uninstall rest of hal, and let the system update the udev

I tend to remember something about binary-only Amazon package from Gentoo's bugzilla where just having the plain hal library was enough to keep it working, and to keep the hal library working, you get the old libudev.so.0 too
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dragonlord
Guru
Guru


Joined: 22 Aug 2004
Posts: 350
Location: Switzerland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ssuominen wrote:
Dragonlord wrote:
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.


Here you are again, same old story from:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7244424-highlight-.html#7244424
http://forums.gentoo.org/search.php?search_author=Dragonlord

It's working exactly as documented and now 198 is defaulting to the new predictable network naming which is the end of this story.

It certainly does not if manual renaming is required to prevent interfaces flicking around every reboot. And packages requiring 171 while being fully present in portage is now suddenly my problem too, right? I remember a time where GenToo had been about solving problems not creating them.
_________________
Leader and Head Programmer: Epsylon, Drag[en]gine and others
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2133
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dragonlord wrote:
ssuominen wrote:
Dragonlord wrote:
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.


Here you are again, same old story from:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7244424-highlight-.html#7244424
http://forums.gentoo.org/search.php?search_author=Dragonlord

It's working exactly as documented and now 198 is defaulting to the new predictable network naming which is the end of this story.

It certainly does not if manual renaming is required to prevent interfaces flicking around every reboot. And packages requiring 171 while being fully present in portage is now suddenly my problem too, right? I remember a time where GenToo had been about solving problems not creating them.


Then you haven't read anything you have been told to, which doesn't suprise me. The exact point of the predictable network naming scheme is that you don't need to rename them at all as static names are always there.

For others reading:

- Renaming to reserved namespace like eth0 -> eth1, eth1 -> eth0 won't work.
- Renaming to free namespace like eth0 -> net1, eth1 -> net0 works.
- Using the new predictable network naming works. This is the new default with >=sys-fs/udev-198:

http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PredictableNetworkInterfaceNames
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ssuominen wrote:
BitJam wrote:

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.
This sounds like you should just copy libhal.so.0 (or whatever it was called again) and libudev.so.0 to /usr/local/lib/ and uninstall rest of hal, and let the system update the udev

First, this does not work. Just having hal installed is not sufficient; it actually has to be running. Second, it is very peculiar that merely *installing* (and not running udev) would cause this breakage. Third, this does not solve all the many other problems I have with udev, including borking all of my terminals.

I've already copied the version of udev that is working to /usr/local/portage and bumped the version so I can use emerge again without getting spammed by the message above.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
libertytrek
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Posts: 254

PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4399

PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ssuominen wrote:
No, currently eudev doesn't solve anything. It's something you might use if you want to contribute to make it useful, but nothing to be recommended for any user since there is currently no gain.

I'm too a user with mask udev >171 so i will get hit too by this lost of udev-171 from the tree.
My question is then : i don't see any gain but problems (that network scheme is problem, as it bug user and solve nothing) to use udev > 171, and you said there's no gain from evdev, but is there are lost ? Because no gain + trouble vs no gain + no lost will answer my next step.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 4399

PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 444

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:13 am    Post subject: Where is the How To? Reply with quote

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


Joined: 18 Mar 2013
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1510

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

verbit wrote:
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.


It isn't the Gentoo dev's fault. In fact, they are doing a heroic job of keeping the mess out of our hair. Its the upstream "redesign" of the linux init system to systemd that is to blame. You would actually be better of switching to a new version of udev, or in your case, switching to eudev since you are using an older kernel. Once the new version is in place the problems go away. Its not the first package to have a few bumps in the upgrade process. Its only a matter of time before the old version is no longer compatible as krinn pointed out. This is the price we pay for having a critical component of most systems under the whim of a commercial developer with an agenda to make everyone use his software.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 2463
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
It isn't the Gentoo dev's fault. In fact, they are doing a heroic job of keeping the mess out of our hair.


I'm not sure about that. Every time I've seen eudev mentioned lately as an alternative, I've seen it be poo-poo-ed by a dev.
"If offers no real value", "It's a dead end", etc. That certainly doesn't sound too supportive of end-users or an alternative to systemd/udev.

Quote:
Its the upstream "redesign" of the linux init system to systemd that is to blame.


Which was a valid reason for mdev starting up (which devs dumped all over as it was getting started)
or eudev, which they don't want one to use (so it seems from commentary).


Note: I'm still using 171-r6 (from my local portage) and it works well with the 3.8.1 kernel.
If it breaks sometime in the future I'll deal with it, either by embracing an *udev alternative
or by removing it from my system completely and going back to the way that worked for decades.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - amd64-multilib, 3.15.9-zen, glibc-2.17, gcc-4.7.3-r1, eudev
xorg-server-1.16, openbox w/lxpanel, nouveau, oss4(2010)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kurly
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 182

PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:

I'm not sure about that. Every time I've seen eudev mentioned lately as an alternative, I've seen it be poo-poo-ed by a dev.
"If offers no real value", "It's a dead end", etc. That certainly doesn't sound too supportive of end-users or an alternative to systemd/udev.

The dev doing that is one of the udev devs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BitJam
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 12 Aug 2003
Posts: 2454
Location: Silver City, NM

PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Be careful! It may be contagious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 1510

PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 5:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2133
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 6:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Doctor wrote:
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.


Sorry, but you are misinformed. Separate /usr has nothing to do with udev or eudev, both of them are installed to / and will work with separate /usr just like 171 did.
Also, both udev-197-r8, udev-198-r1, and any eudev in tree works down to 2.6.32 so support for older kernels is not related to eudev.
Like I said earlier, and I don't mean with any trolling, eudev currently doesn't solve any user visible problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
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