On 05/08/13 23:18, Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 10:24:27 -0400, Tanstaafl wrote:
But there's not a lot of point as eudev isn't that different to udev
now, AFAICT, and a recent update forced me to switch back to udev
because eudev hadn't been updated (on ~amd64).
Can you elaborate on what this update was that forced you to go back to
regular udev?
I can't remember what it was now, and it may have been avoidable by
making virtual/udev-206 (or whichever version it was that needed a higher
udev version than eudev could provide). It's moot now as eudev has been
updated and portage is happy again, but it would be a concern if this
happened regularly.
I expect it to happen around every new udev release that causes slight
incompability; the default of the virtual/udev, sys-fs/udev, doesn't
have to wait for the alternative providers.
- Samuli
