Alan McKinnon wrote: > On 17/03/2015 22:16, Dale wrote: >> Mike Gilbert wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Alan McKinnon wrote: >>>>> Your basic problem is that you have static and static-libs in USE. When >>>>> applied to lvm, a whole bunch of blockers kick in and you get what you >>>>> got. So take them out of USE. >>>>> >>>>> USE="static static-libs" has it's uses, it's great for building rescue >>>>> disks, busybox and maybe some disk repair utils, but makes very little >>>>> sense on a regular workstation. If you break your workstation, you'll >>>>> boot off a rescue disk and use the tools on it to fix your install, so >>>>> you don't need it on the main system. >>>>> >>>>> There is nothing wrong with your eudev. >>>>> lvm2 is bitching about blockers between lvm2 built with "USE=static" and >>>>> udev - there's some incompatibility there and the ebuild knows about them >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I went through the package.use file and commented out the static and >>>> static-libs stuff. It seems happy but thing is, when I put them there, >>>> they were needed for some reason. Actually, all the parts I found had >>>> the output of where emerge said those were needed. Maybe the reason >>>> they were needed then has changed and they are no longer needed. I hope >>>> anyway. ;-) >>> I know there were some guides for doing LVM root that used to advise >>> building stuff statically, probably because of some problem with >>> genkernel. >>> >>> With a modern initramfs (dracut, and possible recent genkernel), >>> shared libs work just as well, so there should be no need. >>> >>> >> Well, in package.use, it has some output of emerge that said it needed. >> Here is a snippet: >> >> # required by sys-fs/lvm2-2.02.109[static] >> # required by @selected >> # required by @world (argument) >> #=sys-apps/util-linux-2.24.1-r3 static-libs > > You are reading it wrong. That means: > util-linux needs to be built with USE="static-libs" > because > lvm2 is already built with USE="static" > > None of which explains why you originally built lvm2 that way.
It was because emerge told me it needed it for some reason. It is very rare that I just put something in package.use on my own. On the rare times I have done it, it is on a package that I use and I need to enable something but don't want to enable it globally or only that one package has that USE flag. A couple examples, gimp, nut, gtkam is a few that I have in there because of some option I need to enable/disable. >> # required by virtual/udev-208-r2 >> # required by @selected >> # required by @world (argument) >> #virtual/libudev static-libs >> >> # required by virtual/udev-208-r2[gudev] >> # required by @selected >> # required by @world (argument) >> #virtual/libgudev static-libs >> >> There's a couple more but you get the idea. I don't use genkernel, >> tried it but never got a working kernel from it so I do them by hand. >> Everything built OK with no more complaining so I guess whatever it is >> has changed. Still weird tho. > > This has nothing to do with genkernel. > More than likely, you followed some daft advice on teh intarwebz saying > you need a static lvm to be able to boot / on lvm. > > I don't have / on lvm. /boot and / are on regular partitions. Everything else, /usr, /var and /home, are on lvm. Keep in mind, I was trying to avoid that init thingy. I mentioned genkernel because Mike mentioned it. I tried it ages ago and never got a kernel that would boot. I don't even have it installed here. I started doing them by hand and have been pretty good at it ever since. Odd I know. Dale :-) :-)
