| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
firephoto
Veteran
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
Posts: 1612
Location: +48° 5' 23.40", -119° 48' 30.00"
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 7:37 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| 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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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)
| Quote: | | 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
_________________
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
puke
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | 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.
| Quote: | | 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
| Quote: | | 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 .. 
_________________
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cdunham
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 211
Location: Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | 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...
_________________
This post more meaningful in a scalar context. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 02, 2005 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
am i sure about what? you quoted quite a bit 
but yes, i am sure about everything i said there.
_________________
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
puke
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 05 Oct 2002
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
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.
| Quote: | | 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 (??). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cdunham
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 211
Location: Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | 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?
_________________
This post more meaningful in a scalar context. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
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
_________________
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cdunham
Apprentice
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
Posts: 211
Location: Rhode Island
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks, dsd, that makes perfect sense. Perhaps there needs to be a profile option in packages.gentoo.org...
_________________
This post more meaningful in a scalar context. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tempest
n00b
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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?
_________________
For every problem there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tecknojunky
Veteran
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 1937
Location: Montréal
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2005 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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: | | 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.
_________________
(7 of 9) Installing star-trek/species-8.4.7.2::talax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ard Righ
Guru
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 337
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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
_________________
Answer a simple question with a simple answer! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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.
_________________
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tecknojunky
Veteran
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 1937
Location: Montréal
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 05, 2005 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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.
_________________
(7 of 9) Installing star-trek/species-8.4.7.2::talax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ericxx2005
Apprentice
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 231
Location: 10 square miles surrounded by reality
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | 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? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bone
Apprentice
Joined: 07 Jun 2002
Posts: 255
Location: Midwest, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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: | | [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 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsd
Developer
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Posts: 2162
Location: nr London
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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
_________________
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tecknojunky
Veteran
Joined: 19 Oct 2002
Posts: 1937
Location: Montréal
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2005 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bone wrote: | | Code: | | [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: | | rm /etc/make.profile; ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0/2.4 /etc/make.profile |
|
_________________
(7 of 9) Installing star-trek/species-8.4.7.2::talax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
