On Sunday, 17 April 2022 14:54:50 -00 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 9:03 AM Peter Humphrey <pe...@prh.myzen.co.uk> wrote: > > On Sunday, 17 April 2022 12:13:06 -00 Neil Bothwick wrote: > > > > --->8 > > > > > It looks like this is cause my using mixed keywords, amd64 for udev and > > > ~amd64 for systemd-boot/utils. Does keywording udev-250 resolve the > > > blocks? > > > > Yes, after keywording several others, thus: > > > > ~sys-apps/systemd-tmpfiles-249.9 > > ~sys-apps/systemd-utils-250.4 > > ~sys-fs/udev-250 > > ~virtual/tmpfiles-0-r2 > > > > But then, after rebooting because of the udev update, systemd-boot-250-r1 > > has come in. I can't revert those keywords though, because then I'd have > > to ditch elogind in favour of systemd. I really do not want to do that. > > Can't you just fix your USE flags with systemd-utils? Why revert?
No, because the flag I'd need is 'boot', and that triggers switching from elogind to systemd. > If I need to bump a package up to ~arch temporarily usually I just do > it with an atom like "<sys-apps/systemd-utils-251" or something like > that, so that I keep getting ~arch updates within the major version, > but the next major bump happens when it hits stable. Obviously you > need to understand the versioning/stabilization policies for the > packages involved if you do that, and it is situational, but you > really shouldn't be mixing keywords anyway unless you're comfortable > with that. No, I know it's a bad idea to mix keywords, but how else do I get systemd-boot on a stable system? -- Regards, Peter.
