On 2013-08-12 6:48 AM, Alan McKinnon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 12/08/2013 12:19, Tanstaafl wrote:
Hmmm... so is it eudev that would need to be updated to 'fix' this? Or
virtual/udev? Or both?
It has to do with how virtuals work.
If you have the virtual in @world, and none of the packages that satisfy
the virtual are in world, then portage is free to do whatever it deems
correct to satisfy the virtual. This is what it did, and it is rather
important you understand why this is so.
If you have the virtual in world, and one of the packages that satisfy
the virtual are in world, then portage will not uninstall that package
and instead obey your instruction.
Ok, I'm getting there...
I just confirmed that while I do have sys-fs/udev in world, but I *do*
have virtual/udev.
So, based on what Samuli said about sys-fs/udev being the gentoo default
(where is this documented by the way?), seems the simplest thing to do
is add sys-fs/eudev to @world, but is this really the most appropriate
'gentoo way'?
Or, maybe just remove virtual/udev from @world? Or both (add
sys-fs/eudev, remove virtual/udev)?
Actually, since udev/eudev are more appropriately @system packages, it
would make more sense to add them there - except @system is defined not
by a file but by the profile, and so would require a USE flag to define
this, but if I recall, adding a USE flag for this was decided against
(why I don't know)...
