Bug 324507 – Stabilize sys-fs/udev-151-r4

• Status: RESOLVED FIXED
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Pacho Ramos 2010-06-17 19:21:16 UTC]

Hello

This will be needed in a near future for stabilizing Gnome 2.30, since it requires udisks, that needs a newer lvm2 (bug 324485) that needs:

        || ( >=sys-fs/udev-151-r2 =sys-fs/udev-146-r3 )

Then, since 149 is the current stable on, for example, amd64, would be nice to stabilize a newer udev version.

For now, I am running 151-r4 without problems.

Feel free to choose the version you prefer and add arches when you think it's ready

Thanks a lot

Reproducible: Always

[Comment 1 Matthias Schwarzott 2010-06-20 21:24:26 UTC]

Well, as I added STARTUP property to udev specifically for udev-151-r4 (see changelog and look for STARTUP in lvm2 rules), I think it could be better to stable udev-151-r4 but am not sure.

In case still udev-151-r2 should be stabled, please check if it doesn't interact bad with new lvm2.

[Comment 2 Pacho Ramos 2010-06-20 21:54:11 UTC]

I think -r4 should be ok (I am using it without problems, but cannot check how does it work with lvm2 since I don't have any lvm partition :-( )

[Comment 3 Pacho Ramos 2010-07-16 12:07:03 UTC]

Are you ok with adding arches then?

[Comment 4 Robin Johnson 2010-07-21 18:45:01 UTC]

Nothing blocking from me, +1 on stabilization.

[Comment 5 Pacho Ramos 2010-07-21 18:51:21 UTC]

Robin give us his ok on #gentoo-dev

Arches, please test and mark stable

[Comment 6 Myckel Habets 2010-07-21 20:42:18 UTC]

make --no-print-directory check-TESTS
Must have root permissions to run properly.
PASS: test/udev-test.pl
=============
1 test passed
=============

Is this expected?

[Comment 7 Paweł Hajdan, Jr. (RETIRED) 2010-07-22 03:39:33 UTC]

x86 stable

Thanks Myckel, that's a good point. I don't think it should prevent stabilization though.

[Comment 8 Toralf Förster 2010-07-22 09:33:48 UTC]

I get this :

n22 /etc/portage # /etc/init.d/udev restart
 * Caching service dependencies ...                                                                                   [ ok ]
 * The udev init-script is written for baselayout-2!
 * Please do not use it with baselayout-1!.

and now I'm wondering whether this message is wrong or whether baselayout-2 should be stabilized too .

[Comment 9 Samuli Suominen (RETIRED) 2010-07-22 09:39:53 UTC]

(In reply to comment #8)
> I get this :
> 
> n22 /etc/portage # /etc/init.d/udev restart
>  * Caching service dependencies ...                                            
>                                       [ ok ]
>  * The udev init-script is written for baselayout-2!
>  * Please do not use it with baselayout-1!.
> 
> and now I'm wondering whether this message is wrong or whether baselayout-2
> should be stabilized too .
> 

The message is right, and no, baselayout doesn't need to be stabilized for this. You simply shouldn't use that init script with baselayout-1... that's all.

[Comment 10 Tobias Klausmann (RETIRED) 2010-07-25 15:35:45 UTC]

Stable on alpha.

[Comment 11 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) 2010-07-25 16:30:12 UTC]

HPPA declines until a fixed glibc is keyworded (bug #294470).

[Comment 12 Pacho Ramos 2010-07-27 18:41:23 UTC]

amd64 stable

[Comment 13 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) 2010-08-02 20:51:55 UTC]

(In reply to comment #11)
> HPPA declines until a fixed glibc is keyworded (bug #294470).
> 

[Comment 14 Guy Martin (RETIRED) 2010-08-03 20:58:31 UTC]

It seems that #294470 doesn't solve all the issues we're having on hppa.
We're running into a similar bug with inotify : #331119.

[Comment 15 Brent Baude (RETIRED) 2010-08-12 15:13:19 UTC]

ppc64 stable

[Comment 16 Joe Jezak (RETIRED) 2010-08-13 13:27:51 UTC]

Marked ppc stable.

[Comment 17 Markus Meier 2010-08-28 08:04:57 UTC]

arm stable

[Comment 18 Raúl Porcel (RETIRED) 2010-08-28 19:09:00 UTC]

ia64/m68k/s390/sh/sparc stable

[Comment 19 Jeroen Roovers (RETIRED) 2010-10-29 06:20:41 UTC]

Stable for HPPA and closing.