On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Mark Pariente <markparie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-07-28 at 11:16 -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Michael Hampicke <m...@hadt.biz> wrote:
>> > Am 28.07.2013 10:07, schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger:
>> >> Am 28.07.2013 10:04, schrieb Canek Peláez Valdés:
>> >>
>> >>> The only "special" thing I'm doing is to mask >sys-apps/systemd-204,
>> >>> since 205 introduced the new cgroups management code (with systemd as
>> >>> the only writer of the cgroups hierarchy), and it seems to cause some
>> >>> minor problems with logind. Other than that, it works withouth a
>> >>> glitch: gnome-base/gnome-3.8.0, sys-apps/systemd-204, no consolekit at
>> >>> all.
>> >>
>> >> Same here, yes. I run systemd-206 but I didn't notice an problem(s) yet.
>> >> Maybe there are some and I don't get it ;-)
>> >>
>> >
>> > I had one problem, but I am not sure, if it's related to systemd > 204,
>> > the removal of consolekit, or gnome at all.
>> >
>> > But when logging into my gnome session, /usr/libexec/gvfsd-fuse can not
>> > be started, because the permissions of /dev/fuse are rw------ root:root
>> >
>> > Other distros like ubuntu have a fuse group for that, which does not
>> > exist on gentoo. So I assume the default permissions for /dev/fuse on
>> > gentoo machines should be rw-rw-rw- root:root?
>>
>> My problem was that *sometimes* (not always) I was unable to unlock my
>> session after suspending my laptop or desktop. Reverting back to
>> systemd-204 solved it, so I'm assuming that's the problem, although I
>> didn't really investigated the issue.
>
> This turned out to be an upstream issue. See:
>
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67267

Yeah, I suspected so; that was my theory in the mail I sent yesterday:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/267762

So it is indeed the new slices code. I'm staying on 204 until 207 comes out.

Regards.
-- 
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Reply via email to