Re: Systemd getting in the way

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.


(BTW, this might be a good read, re: binary package compatibility
between profiles:

<news://gmane.io/[email protected]> )

-- 
Nuno Silva