When installing gentoo 2005.0 devfsd is not an automatical depency of the 2.4 kernel sources. If one does not know that, the boot will fail, because devfsd is missing. After manual installation of devfsd boot works perfect. This, however, should be noted in the installation documentation, as long as 2.4 can be chosen users must know that and not 'experience' the problem. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install 2005.0 2. Choose make.profile for 2.4 kernel 3. Finish installation (without installing devfsd manually) 4. Reboot Actual Results: Boot Fails. Expected Results: Boot properly.
Did you update your profile to default-linux/x86/2005.0/2.4?
Sorry, I overread the "Choose make.profile for 2.4 kernel" line. But at which time did you change the symlink?
hi sven, i changed the symlink directly after i did the emerge --sync. i strictly followed the handbook on this. so basically it says, after one syncs the portage tree that the profile is deprecated and one should change this. so i did. cheers
When installing from stage3, it seems like a profile change will not pull devfsd in, because udev from the stage already fulfills the virtual/dev-manager dependency. It'll only get installed if you install from stage1 or stage2 because it'll get pulled in during the emerge --emptytree system step.
correct ... the install docs should have this noted that users have to `emerge -C udev && emerge devfsd` if they wish to use 2.4
perfect :-) as soon as it gets noted this report should be considered as fixed :)
Created attachment 59377 [details, diff] 2.4 + emerge devfsd A small para on the need to unmerge udev and emerge devfsd in case someone is using a 2.4 kernel.
Shyam: the current patch will have this done by all 2.4 users, including those who did a stage1/2. Stage1/2 users aren't affected by this since devfsd will already be installed. You'll need to reshape the patch so that only stage3 users will execute your commands.
(In reply to comment #8) > Shyam: the current patch will have this done by all 2.4 users, including those > who did a stage1/2. Stage1/2 users aren't affected by this since devfsd will > already be installed. Agreed. I think a simple "If you have installed from Stage 3" or something similar will suffice. > You'll need to reshape the patch so that only stage3 users will execute your > commands. Will do that, and I guess genkernel users have to do this as well. So we'll have to position it likewise.
genkernel users don't need to do this; they're informed to use "--udev" only if they're using a 2.6 kernel.
(In reply to comment #10) > genkernel users don't need to do this; they're informed to use "--udev" only if > they're using a 2.6 kernel. Okay, but how does that change the already installed udev for a Stage 3? Would "genkernel all" (for a 2.4) automatically get back devfsd? IIRC, I don't think so. And that means they would have to manually switch to devfsd to ensure that virtual/dev-manager is devfsd and not udev.
Created attachment 59852 [details, diff] 2.4 + Stage 3 + emerge devfsd Specifies Stage 3 installs need to do this.
Smithie, a few remarks on the patch... 1/ Don't use capital letters and use <e>...</e> together. The idea behind <e> is just to /emphasise/ the text so you don't need to USE CAPS ALL THE TIME! 2/ Why is "Stage" capitalized? 3/ Why is "Kernels" capitalized? 4/ Why stress the "ONLY" in the code listing? Imo, you can just remove it, it's stressed in the paragraph above it already 5/ Can't you put the information somewhere so you don't need to duplicate the text?
You're right on the genkernel stuff; I misread the comment.
(In reply to comment #13) > Smithie, a few remarks on the patch... > [snip] i had nothing to do with this bug... i assume you are refering to fox2mike...
Created attachment 60110 [details, diff] hb-install-tools+2.4noudev.patch Moving to "Installing Necessary System Tools" chapter. I'm still hunting for devs to see if this is specific to x86.
(In reply to comment #16) > I'm still hunting for devs to see if this is specific to x86. Alpha - Had a chat with kloeri on IRC Stage 1 -> udev by default Stage 2/3 -> devfsd by default So, this bug doesn't affect Alpha as such.
Personally, I don't really get it, but if kloeri sais so :) For future reference: - default-linux/virtuals declares udev as the default dev manager - default-linux/alpha/2005.0 does not override this - default-linux/alpha/2005.0/2.4/virtuals does (to devfsd) So one should think that a stage1/2 installation does give udev. One thing we learn from this: kloeri smokes pot, or GDP should not rely solely on the profile information, or Shyam didn't make his point clear to kloeri :)
Committed.
FYI, gmsoft removed the 2.4 profile for the hppa a while back.
