no more development-sources?

Message

firephoto · Post by **firephoto** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:37 pm

dsd wrote:ok, let me try and clear some things up!

Thanks, that makes sense of things with the change and some of the "older" package history. I mostly only had the "vanilla" getting pulled in so I'd always have somewhat of an alert to when a new stable kernel was out so I just have the next versions rc's masked for now but this isn't very useful since most patches are against the 2.6.11.0 kernel and not the 11-dot releases.

I think the idea of having the development sources pull in the latest-in-any-form vanilla kernel might be received well by some but it would mean throwing the release kernel in their when it is finished since there's a period of time before the next kernel's rc comes out but that should only be a matter of bumping the ebuild name like anything else. Not sure how needed it is since gentoo-sources doesn't really do anything to hurt the vanilla kernel.

Post by **dsd** » Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:56 pm

i'm not sure i understand exactly what you are saying

firephoto wrote:I think the idea of having the development sources pull in the latest-in-any-form vanilla kernel might be received well by some

thats not the case, most users will only get the latest stable kernel in their chosen branch, not the -rc ones, unless they explicitly ask for them (e.g. remove the keywords or go into testing tree)

but that should only be a matter of bumping the ebuild name like anything else.

thats all it is at the moment, and all it has been for a very long time. as an example, vanilla-sources-2.6.12_rc1.ebuild is identical to vanilla-sources-2.6.11.ebuild except for CVS header and keywords

puke · Post by **puke** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:10 pm

Ok I need some help.

I use kernel 2.4 (hardened-sources) on a production box. I don't want to switch to 2.6 now.

Also, I've noticed that my /etc/make.profile still points to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2004.0.

Do I need to update my make.profile link? (to what? I've looked for upgrade documentation, couldn't see it?)

And do I need to put in a portage mask for =<hardened-sources-2.4.99 ?

BTW the way the Gentoo docs are organized is really starting to bug me. Very hard to find what you are looking for..

Post by **dsd** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:26 pm

I use kernel 2.4 (hardened-sources) on a production box. I don't want to switch to 2.6 now.

hardened-dev-sources is not being merged into hardened-sources for now, so hardened-sources will stay as 2.4 only.

Do I need to update my make.profile link? (to what? I've looked for upgrade documentation, couldn't see it?)

you should probably upgrade to a 2005.0 profile, see http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml

BTW the way the Gentoo docs are organized is really starting to bug me. Very hard to find what you are looking for..

feel free to be specific about what makes them badly organised ..

cdunham · Post by **cdunham** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 10:11 pm

the people that mentioned the package.mask thing: vanilla-sources-2.6 and gentoo-sources-2.6 were masked. we've included 2.6 kernels under this name in the tree for a few months now, but you never noticed because we had them in package.mask! the mask was removed as soon as 2005.0 came out as we then intended the switch to take place - packages.gentoo.org is out of date!

Are you sure? There is no entry in packages.mask, but it's still marked as masked in packages.gentoo.org...

Post by **dsd** » Sat Apr 02, 2005 10:58 pm

am i sure about what? you quoted quite a bit

but yes, i am sure about everything i said there.

puke · Post by **puke** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:13 am

Thanks for your quick response!

dsd wrote: hardened-dev-sources is not being merged into hardened-sources for now, so hardened-sources will stay as 2.4 only.

BTW the way the Gentoo docs are organized is really starting to bug me. Very hard to find what you are looking for..
feel free to be specific about what makes them badly organised ..

Well, I just took another look and found this:

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/list.xml

That's a format I prefer. They don't seem to be searchable; in fact, I don't think anything on the main site is (??).

cdunham · Post by **cdunham** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:27 am

am i sure about what? you quoted quite a bit
but yes, i am sure about everything i said there.

Yes, sorry about that. I was referring to packages.gentoo.org being out of date. Isn't this automatically-generated? Either way, why is it still showing the 2.6 gentoo-sources versions as hard masked?

Post by **dsd** » Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:10 am

it does update automatically, maybe theres a bug.

actually, just thought, perhaps it is using one of the 2.4 profiles, where all 2.6 packages are profile-masked for obvious reasons

cdunham · Post by **cdunham** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:30 pm

Thanks, dsd, that makes perfect sense. Perhaps there needs to be a profile option in packages.gentoo.org...

tempest · Post by **tempest** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:29 pm

All the above makes perfect sense. Just one question, though: I currently have development-sources 2.6.9 and 2.6.11.4 installed, how do I unmerge these packages?

tecknojunky · Post by **tecknojunky** » Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:45 pm

I'm not sure if this is what is causing my troubles, but I ended up emerging the 2.6 linux-headers on my cluster's nodes running OM (hence 2.4). Now, aclocal segfaults on emerging coreutils on all of them.

Like many things Gentoo, this is yet one other change that is badly managed. I'm getting very tired of those fuckups.

For those, like me, who made the same mistake:

Code: Select all

rm /etc/make.profile; ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0/2.4 /etc/make.profile

The, redo a emerge -p world to verify the linux-headers for the 2.4 kernel will get merged back.

Ard Righ · Post by **Ard Righ** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:21 pm

Ok, I notice by doing a 'emerge -Cp gentoo-sources' that it still finds the old gentoo-dev-source packages. So once I update my kernel, I will go about removing the older source directories

Post by **dsd** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 6:01 pm

tecknojunky wrote:I'm not sure if this is what is causing my troubles, but I ended up emerging the 2.6 linux-headers on my cluster's nodes running OM (hence 2.4). Now, aclocal segfaults on emerging coreutils on all of them.

Like many things Gentoo, this is yet one other change that is badly managed. I'm getting very tired of those fuckups.

many people have been running linux 2.6 headers for a very long time, and yours is the first problem report that i've seen from this migration process. please dont assume that problems you experience affect everyone. instead of complaining on the forums which gets you nowhere, you need to file a bug.

tecknojunky · Post by **tecknojunky** » Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:01 pm

dsd wrote:
tecknojunky wrote:I'm not sure if this is what is causing my troubles, but I ended up emerging the 2.6 linux-headers on my cluster's nodes running OM (hence 2.4). Now, aclocal segfaults on emerging coreutils on all of them.

Like many things Gentoo, this is yet one other change that is badly managed. I'm getting very tired of those fuckups.
many people have been running linux 2.6 headers for a very long time, and yours is the first problem report that i've seen from this migration process. please dont assume that problems you experience affect everyone. instead of complaining on the forums which gets you nowhere, you need to file a bug.

I'm sorry. Sometimes complaining only serves the purpose of leting out some steam. I admit, it does not solve anything else.

I doubt you can run the 2.6 headers with a 2.4 kernel. I think it's what caused all the segfaults on my box. The main thing is that you had to update the profile and, somehow, I missed that new thing to be done. I still don't know where this was announced.

ericxx2005 · Post by **ericxx2005** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 5:53 pm

amne wrote:
Sources were renamed as announced here:
* development-sources -> vanilla-sources
* gentoo-dev-sources -> become gentoo-sources
* rsbac-dev-sources -> rsbac-sources
* hardened-dev-sources -> hardened-sources
* linux26-headers -> linux-headers

Can anyone try to explain the difference of these to a gentoo newbie? I think I know what vanilla and gentoo-sources are, but whare are the other ones?

Post by **dsd** » Sat Apr 09, 2005 5:55 pm

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-kernel.xml

bone · Post by **bone** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 6:43 pm

tecknojunky wrote:I doubt you can run the 2.6 headers with a 2.4 kernel. I think it's what caused all the segfaults on my box. The main thing is that you had to update the profile and, somehow, I missed that new thing to be done. I still don't know where this was announced.

This is exactly what I am wondering about. I run the grsec-sources-2.4.29.2.1.4 kernel sources and am wondering why an emerge -up world is telling me I need the following:

Code: Select all

[ebuild     U ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.8.1-r4 [2.4.22-r1]

How can I stop this from happening, or is it OK to have these linux-headers with my kernel version?

jt

Post by **dsd** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:56 pm

probably safest to select a 2.4 profile so that the newer headers dont get pulled in. you will find all the details you need in (or linked to from) this thread

tecknojunky · Post by **tecknojunky** » Sun Apr 10, 2005 8:09 pm

bone wrote:
Code: Select all
[ebuild     U ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.8.1-r4 [2.4.22-r1]
How can I stop this from happening, or is it OK to have these linux-headers with my kernel version?

tecknojunky wrote:For those, like me, who made the same mistake:
Code: Select all
rm /etc/make.profile; ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0/2.4 /etc/make.profile