On Sunday, 8 March 2026 23:07:54 Greenwich Mean Time Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-03-08, Jack wrote: > > On 2026.03.08 12:37, [email protected] wrote: > >> On Sunday, 8 March 2026 15:58:47 Greenwich Mean Time Nuno Silva wrote: > >> > On 2026-03-08, [email protected] wrote: > >> > > Greetings, > >> > > > >> > > I've finally managed to get a more-or-less working system put > >> > >> together, > >> > >> > > having been going round in circles, banging my head on convenient > >> > >> walls > >> > >> > > on the way, since before Christmas. > >> > > > >> > > I've had to abandon my favourite systemd-boot, having been unable > >> > >> to get > >> > >> > > it to work (it doesn't behave the way the handbook describes). > >> > >> Instead, > >> > >> > > I've had to fall back on the dreaded grub. > >> > > > >> > > The point of this gripe, though, is that I cannot run an 'emerge > >> > >> -e > >> > >> > > @world' > >> > > any more, because systemd insists on being included. Well, being > >> > >> masked > >> > >> > > stops it, but being explicitly excluded on the command line does > >> > >> not. > >> > >> > > Has anyone here a reliable method of ensuring that systemd stays > >> > >> out of > >> > >> > > the > >> > > way? > >> > > >> > If it's installed, use emerge -pvc systemd to see what's keeping it > >> > >> in > >> > >> > the dependence graph. > >> > > >> > If it's not installed, add -tv to the emerge -e options (and pipe it > >> > through a pager, or do --pretend and write to a file to look at > >> > >> after > >> > >> > emerge completes the output) to get some indication of at least one > >> > >> of > >> > >> > the packages that is pulling it. > >> > >> I didn't get a tree, just the usual block of packages that were > >> supposed to > >> require systemd. This was the block: > >> > >> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "sys-apps/systemd:0/2=" have been > >> masked. > >> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your > >> request: > >> - sys-apps/systemd-9999::gentoo (masked by: package.mask, missing > >> keyword) > >> - sys-apps/systemd-259.2::gentoo (masked by: package.mask, ~amd64 > >> keyword) > >> - sys-apps/systemd-259.1::gentoo (masked by: package.mask, ~amd64 > >> keyword) > >> - sys-apps/systemd-259::gentoo (masked by: package.mask, ~amd64 > >> keyword) > >> - sys-apps/systemd-258.3::gentoo (masked by: package.mask) > >> > >> (dependency required by "sys-fs/lvm2-2.03.22-r7::gentoo" [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "sys-fs/cryptsetup-2.8.3-r1::gentoo" [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "sys-libs/libblockdev-3.4.0::gentoo" [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "sys-fs/udisks-2.11.0-r1::gentoo" [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "kde-frameworks/solid-6.22.0::gentoo" > >> [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "kde-frameworks/kio-6.22.1::gentoo" [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "kde-frameworks/kcmutils-6.22.0::gentoo" > >> [binary]) > >> (dependency required by "kde-plasma/keditfiletype-6.5.5::gentoo" > >> [binary]) > > > > I note that all of these are binary. Are there any binary builds which > > do not use systemd? (I don't know as I don't use binary builds.) In > > my case "-systemd" in make.conf seems to be enough to avoid any use of > > systemd. > > My current first guess, not really having any experience with the > current incarnation of official Gentoo binary packages, would be an > incorrect profile.
$ eselect profile show Current /etc/portage/make.profile symlink: default/linux/amd64/23.0/desktop/plasma > (BTW, this might be a good read, re: binary package compatibility > between profiles: > > <news://gmane.io/[email protected]> ) Hm. I'm having trouble installing a USENET client. Is that available in any other form? -- Regards, Peter.
