Summary: | [RFE] need virtual/devfs (provided by devfsd or udev) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Alexander Papaspyrou <axp> |
Component: | [OLD] Core system | Assignee: | Gentoo's Team for Core System packages <base-system> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | enhancement | CC: | crichey, greg_g, m.debruijne, releng |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Alexander Papaspyrou
2004-02-17 09:09:38 UTC
# find /usr/portage -name '*.ebuild' -exec grep -H 'sys-fs/devfsd' '{}' \; /usr/portage/app-cdr/cdrw-base/cdrw-base-0.2.ebuild:DEPEND="sys-fs/devfsd" [skipped irrelevant stuff] So, there seems to be only one single package that directly depends on devfsd. Then, we have to modify: - the packages and virtuals file(s) in the profile dirs - the sys-fs/{devfsd|udev} ebuilds - the app-cdr/cdrw-base ebuilds IIRC, the eclasses don't have direct deps on devfsd. *** Bug 41699 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** The situation is more complex than just a virtual. Some users do not prefer to activate either devfsd or udev. A complete solution must allow for 1. selection of devfsd, udev, or none starting from stage1,2,3 at install time 2. If none is chosen, populate /dev accordingly 3. Activation of devfsd, udev, or none by the bootscripts This could be easily solved by providing a third bogus package (sys-bogus/mknod-devfs or something) which does nothing but PROVIDEing virtual/devfs for those who want to use the old (very deprecated) way to manage /dev. Devs, anyone? This will have to wait until we can figure out how to get both 2.4 and 2.6 to exist in the profile. For now, emerge inject a version bigger than latest. It looks like this has been fixed recently -- by introducing a virtual for device manangement, as I suggested in the first place. Funny, that... As such, I will close this issue. |