Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
kdbus in the kernel
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19 ... 25, 26, 27  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
asturm
Developer
Developer


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 7005
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
Used to a requirement for a dependency (pre the devs from the last few years) was simple, ie "udev"

That hasn't changed, a version dependency usually comes from buildsystem or packaging constraints, or upstream recommendation, otherwise there is none applied.

Anon-E-moose wrote:
In their infinite wisdom :roll: they've now gone to ">=udev-[whatever version they use]" as a dependency requirement.

Maybe it worked for you, that doesn't mean the version requirement is somehow meaningless for everyone else the maintainers have to care for. Maintaining your own system will always be easier than being responsible for anyone else's.
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 3967
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

genstorm wrote:
Anon-E-moose wrote:
Used to a requirement for a dependency (pre the devs from the last few years) was simple, ie "udev"

That hasn't changed, a version dependency usually comes from buildsystem or packaging constraints, or upstream recommendation, otherwise there is none applied.


No, the constraints don't come from other things, I've looked at too many tar balls and seen that myself.

Quote:
Anon-E-moose wrote:
In their infinite wisdom :roll: they've now gone to ">=udev-[whatever version they use]" as a dependency requirement.

Maybe it worked for you, that doesn't mean the version requirement is somehow meaningless for everyone else the maintainers have to care for. Maintaining your own system will always be easier than being responsible for anyone else's.


Actually if it worked for me, it would work for most others. My system isn't extraordinary or unusual.

I'm sure part of the reason for the version dependencies is simply to get people to upgrade because the devs know best. :roll:
One could also make the case that it's ignorance on their part or perhaps laziness in checking whether versions are needed or not.

Anyway on to other things.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - nouveau, oss4, rx550 for qemu passthrough
Acer laptop E5-575, i3-7100u - i965, alsa
---both---
5.0.13 zen kernel, profile 17.0 (no-pie) amd64-no-multilib
gcc 8.2.0, eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
asturm
Developer
Developer


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 7005
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
genstorm wrote:
Anon-E-moose wrote:
Used to a requirement for a dependency (pre the devs from the last few years) was simple, ie "udev"

That hasn't changed, a version dependency usually comes from buildsystem or packaging constraints, or upstream recommendation, otherwise there is none applied.

No, the constraints don't come from other things, I've looked at too many tar balls and seen that myself.

If you only looked at the tarballs, that's not enough.
Anon-E-moose wrote:
Actually if it worked for me, it would work for most others. My system isn't extraordinary or unusual.

Most < All (you see what's the problem?)
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well it used to be that if there was a requirement for a specific version, you had to comment to explain why, or provide a bug id.

I'm willing to take Anon's summary description at face value, for one, as if there'd been comments to that effect, either in the ebuilds or the eclasses applying the deps, he'd have seen them, and discounted those occurrences.

I don't think there's any merit in making him "prove his assertion" or some other such nonsense; it's perfectly acceptable for him to have a feel for how things have gone in his experience of the last X years, without having to justify it, or be picked up on faux rudeness.

Actually I wouldn't mind seeing the ebuilds Anon works on, if he has an overlay? If not, no worries.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here we go again!

http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1506.0/02614.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5631
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwr wrote:
Here we go again!

http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1506.0/02614.html

Been posted already
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My bad. It's worth getting annoyed at twice, though. :)

Naib wrote:
gwr wrote:
Here we go again!

http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1506.0/02614.html

Been posted already
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3383

PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

However we may all know that kdbus has been submitted - again, I haven't seen much discussion since in lkml.

Am I missing something or has it all been quiet? Any idea what that means?
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5631
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
However we may all know that kdbus has been submitted - again, I haven't seen much discussion since in lkml.

Am I missing something or has it all been quiet? Any idea what that means?
"There is no objections, it must be getting pulled. Good work all we have finally gotten kdbus accepted. By accepted I mean not objected"
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 3967
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
However we may all know that kdbus has been submitted - again, I haven't seen much discussion since in lkml.

Am I missing something or has it all been quiet? Any idea what that means?


I think it means the (k)dbus devs don't have a clue.
They've been told that kdbus won't go into the kernel the way it is right now and
all they're doing is cosmetic fixes, not addressing the issues brought up by the
kernel devs.

I predict that GKH will next say "kdbus is good to go because no one has made any negative comments in the mailing list"
Then there will be the same issues raised by the kernel devs. SSDD. :wink:
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - nouveau, oss4, rx550 for qemu passthrough
Acer laptop E5-575, i3-7100u - i965, alsa
---both---
5.0.13 zen kernel, profile 17.0 (no-pie) amd64-no-multilib
gcc 8.2.0, eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From David Herrmann the latest post:

> I have some more patches pending, mainly metadata rework for 4.2. However, this
> breaks backwards compat so I want to get everything else out first.

Wow, it's like they aren't even paying attention to a word anyone says.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwr wrote:
Wow, it's like they aren't even paying attention to a word anyone says.

Yup, as discussed before it's as if those NAKs never happened.

Honestly, anyone would think you haven't been paying attention to your own thread.. ;p
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:

Honestly, anyone would think you haven't been paying attention to your own thread.. ;p


Ha! I my brain can't process the idiocy. It keeps resetting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwr wrote:
Ha! I my brain can't process the idiocy. It keeps resetting.

Hehe; indeed, the idiocy does keep coming round, with the fanbois constantly acting as if this is the first they've heard of any problems with the design and usage of dbust..

And people wonder why we keep on complaining until things are better, or at least acknowledged to be problems. ;-)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3383

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bruce Schneier has his yearly "Movie-Plot Terror Contest" - an venture into the absurd exercise. Adapting that concept, just a little...

1 - Linus takes off on vacation / funeral / wedding / etc, and leaves a trusted lieutenant in charge for the duration. Something goes wrong in the handoff, and an untrusted party manages to get kdbus into the mainline kernel.
OR
2 - There is a zero-day in the kernel servers, and someone slides kdbus in that way.

Starting with either of the above...

The mysterious "they" who slid kdbus into the kernel don't tell anyone. There just "happens" to be an error in the kernel configurator so that kdbus never shows as an option. However you can add CONFIG_KDBUS and CONFIG_KDBUS_* suboptions, and it will build, just as you asked. This sits unseen in the kernel for a few releases, and just for appearance on every other release, they try to push kdbus in, in the usual way. Then at some point the presence of kdbus is REVEALED, along with the fact that it's been in there for at least six months. A patch is submitted to enable it in the kernel configurator.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
saellaven
Guru
Guru


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 513

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
gwr wrote:
Ha! I my brain can't process the idiocy. It keeps resetting.

Hehe; indeed, the idiocy does keep coming round, with the fanbois constantly acting as if this is the first they've heard of any problems with the design and usage of dbust..

And people wonder why we keep on complaining until things are better, or at least acknowledged to be problems. ;-)


But keep in mind, we (the "I don't want systemd crowd") are haters that don't want to talk about the technical stuff because we're idiots... after all, a million distributions turning into redhat clones can't be wrong!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gwr
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 19 Nov 2014
Posts: 194

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
Bruce Schneier has his yearly "Movie-Plot Terror Contest" - an venture into the absurd exercise. Adapting that concept, just a little...

1 - Linus takes off on vacation / funeral / wedding / etc, and leaves a trusted lieutenant in charge for the duration. Something goes wrong in the handoff, and an untrusted party manages to get kdbus into the mainline kernel.
OR
2 - There is a zero-day in the kernel servers, and someone slides kdbus in that way.

Starting with either of the above...

The mysterious "they" who slid kdbus into the kernel don't tell anyone. There just "happens" to be an error in the kernel configurator so that kdbus never shows as an option. However you can add CONFIG_KDBUS and CONFIG_KDBUS_* suboptions, and it will build, just as you asked. This sits unseen in the kernel for a few releases, and just for appearance on every other release, they try to push kdbus in, in the usual way. Then at some point the presence of kdbus is REVEALED, along with the fact that it's been in there for at least six months. A patch is submitted to enable it in the kernel configurator.


I may never sleep with the lights off again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5631
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gwr wrote:
depontius wrote:
Bruce Schneier has his yearly "Movie-Plot Terror Contest" - an venture into the absurd exercise. Adapting that concept, just a little...

1 - Linus takes off on vacation / funeral / wedding / etc, and leaves a trusted lieutenant in charge for the duration. Something goes wrong in the handoff, and an untrusted party manages to get kdbus into the mainline kernel.
OR
2 - There is a zero-day in the kernel servers, and someone slides kdbus in that way.

Starting with either of the above...

The mysterious "they" who slid kdbus into the kernel don't tell anyone. There just "happens" to be an error in the kernel configurator so that kdbus never shows as an option. However you can add CONFIG_KDBUS and CONFIG_KDBUS_* suboptions, and it will build, just as you asked. This sits unseen in the kernel for a few releases, and just for appearance on every other release, they try to push kdbus in, in the usual way. Then at some point the presence of kdbus is REVEALED, along with the fact that it's been in there for at least six months. A patch is submitted to enable it in the kernel configurator.


I may never sleep with the lights off again.

now consider this...

Quote:
Torvalds insists that people like Greg Kroah-Hartman have taken over huge parts of the day-to-day work maintaining Linux and that they've built up enough trust to be respected

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-16/the-creator-of-linux-on-the-future-without-him
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 3967
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As soon as Linus steps down, "linux" will splinter into more pieces than "unix" ever did.
_________________
Asus m5a99fx, FX 8320 - nouveau, oss4, rx550 for qemu passthrough
Acer laptop E5-575, i3-7100u - i965, alsa
---both---
5.0.13 zen kernel, profile 17.0 (no-pie) amd64-no-multilib
gcc 8.2.0, eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3383

PostPosted: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
As soon as Linus steps down, "linux" will splinter into more pieces than "unix" ever did.


I think if Linux were still a hobby, or slightly more than a hobby, it could keep going. The splintering is going to happen because of all of the corporate interests.

Years back I saw a cartoon, focused on driving. There was a guy in a car, in a sea of cars, all at a standstill, puffing exhaust. There was one thought bubble, leading down to every driver, "If we had mass transit, I would have this highway to myself!"

In a not quite similar vein, I think that's what has happened and is happening to the internet, and to Linux. For those of us with grey hair, there were plenty of online ventures, before the internet took over. CompuServe, Prodigy, AOL, GEnie, The Source, and those are just a few of the bigger names. Then there was also the BBS scene. Other than BBS, those were done by companies who wanted to OWN it. They each wanted to take over the market and be THE online provider.

The internet succeeded because NOBODY owned it - it was a level playing field. Fast-forward ten years (way before today) and all of those same companies want to OWN the internet - they want it all for themselves, all the customers, all the packets, all the revenue. They haven't figured out that the reason the internet succeeded was because it wasn't owned - that in fulfilling their dreams, they're killing it. Who knows, maybe today they won't - these days people seem to be much more sheep-like in that respect than they used to.

Same for Linux. (Same for other things too, but right now these are the two that come to mind.)

By the way, in my "nightmare scenario" / "movie plot dystopia", one of those CONFIG_KDBUS_* is CONFIG_KDBUS_UDEV, which ties udev notification to kdbus to systemd.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tld
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1392

PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2015 3:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
As soon as Linus steps down, "linux" will splinter into more pieces than "unix" ever did.
Yup...and one can only hope that the kernel devs that actually know what they're doing will go with the right splinter. It sure doesn't look like too many would be very happy with any kdbus crowd version of the kernel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
KuroNeko
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Oct 2014
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 5:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not sure in which thread this belongs:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-June/033170.html
Quote:
kdbus support is no longer compile-time optional. It is now
always built-in. However, it can still be disabled at
runtime using the kdbus=0 kernel command line setting, and
that setting may be changed to default to off, by specifying
--disable-kdbus at build-time. Note though that the kernel
command line setting has no effect if the kdbus.ko kernel
module is not installed, in which case kdbus is (obviously)
also disabled. We encourage all downstream distributions to
begin testing kdbus by adding it to the kernel images in the
development distributions, and leaving kdbus support in
systemd enabled.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naib
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5631
Location: Removed by Neddy

PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 5:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow just wow
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tld
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1392

PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

KuroNeko wrote:
Not sure in which thread this belongs:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2015-June/033170.html

Does anyone even have a clue what they're talking about there? None of this is in the kernel at all as yet right? What am I missing?

EDIT: Are they saying that to use the new systemd you have to use kernel patches of theirs?? If so, this while thing's just gone to a new level of absurdity.


Last edited by tld on Fri Jun 19, 2015 6:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
i4dnf
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 265
Location: Bucharest, Romania

PostPosted: Fri Jun 19, 2015 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I suppose that's how they think they can force kdbus inclusion in 4.2.

Interesting how they've timed this release with Linus' holidays ...
_________________
"The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not MAD" (SALVATOR DALI)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 17, 18, 19 ... 25, 26, 27  Next
Page 18 of 27

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum