Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Understanding how to fix things in an ebuild
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Installing Gentoo
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
matop
n00b
n00b


Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 9:34 pm    Post subject: Understanding how to fix things in an ebuild Reply with quote

I'm relatively new to gentoo. It's work but I feel like I understand my system significantly better and have a much tighter system.
I know what I've added and have just what I need. Of course that's only because the ebuild creators have done a good job putting in dependencies and everything.

Which brings me to the problem I ran into yesterday.

I was trying to check out the Midori browser and it relies on the webkit-gtk toolkit.

Unfortunately it has a dependency on webkit-gtk-1.8.3-r200 which has a bug in that it won't build successfully in the sandbox (I had to look up what the sandbox was). It turns out there is already a webkit-gtk-1.8.3-r300 which doesn't have that problem, but the midori ebuild still points to r200.

What's the gentoo way for getting this fixed.

- Report a bug against the midori ebuild? indicating it should use a later webkit-gtk library?
- Use an overlay (never done that - not sure how to even select one)
- Fix it myself (could be fun, but I'm not sure where to start - would I create an overlay - where are the package definitions - any good introduction on fixing issues like this?)

Thanks for any insight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2131
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is significant difference between -r200 and -r300:

Quote:

-r200 is SLOT="2" and is using GTK+ 2.x
-r300 is SLOT="3" and is using GTK+ 3.x


So www-client/midori will require SLOT="2" when building with USE="deprecated" and SLOT="3" with USE="-deprecated"

If webkit-gtk is failing for you, you can file a bug at http://bugs.gentoo.org/ and if you have a fix ready, you can post it there too -- as an attachment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
matop
n00b
n00b


Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see - that makes sense.

I had read about slots but it wasn't clear when they kick in.

Given that - I do need to report a bug against webkit-gtk.

I had thought there was already one but now I can't find it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yngwin
Developer
Developer


Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4394
Location: Suzhou, China

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mind you, this -r200 vs -r300 thing is the totally counter-intuitive way (to put it nicely) that our gtk/gnome maintainers have decided to handle gtk2 vs gtk3. This is not the normal way it is done in the rest of Gentoo.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2131
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yngwin wrote:
Mind you, this -r200 vs -r300 thing is the totally counter-intuitive way (to put it nicely) that our gtk/gnome maintainers have decided to handle gtk2 vs gtk3. This is not the normal way it is done in the rest of Gentoo.


Yes it is, it's the default policy[1] defined by the GTK+ maintainers. Latest GTK+ should always be preferred, and if that is not possible, then create own SLOTs for each GTK+ version.

Anything with USE="gtk2" or similar is a bug and should block http://bugs.gentoo.org/420493

Please don't mislead users

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/374057
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yngwin
Developer
Developer


Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4394
Location: Suzhou, China

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ssuominen wrote:
Please don't mislead users

I'm not misleading users. I'm just pointing out that the way this is done is unique to the gtk2 vs gtk3 situation.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2131
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yngwin wrote:
ssuominen wrote:
Please don't mislead users

I'm not misleading users. I'm just pointing out that the way this is done is unique to the gtk2 vs gtk3 situation.


It's the way other graphical toolkits are also handled, gtk+:1 (for GTK+-1.2), x11-libs/qt-core:4, x11-libs/fox:1.6 (for older FOX), and then down to "base" libraries like libnl:1.1 (old netlink socket lib)

So yeah, own SLOTs are preferred for each API/ABI if sanely possible and required
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yngwin
Developer
Developer


Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4394
Location: Suzhou, China

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ssuominen wrote:
yngwin wrote:
ssuominen wrote:
Please don't mislead users

I'm not misleading users. I'm just pointing out that the way this is done is unique to the gtk2 vs gtk3 situation.


It's the way other graphical toolkits are also handled, gtk+:1 (for GTK+-1.2), x11-libs/qt-core:4, x11-libs/fox:1.6 (for older FOX), and then down to "base" libraries like libnl:1.1 (old netlink socket lib)

So yeah, own SLOTs are preferred for each API/ABI if sanely possible and required

I'm not aware of anything else (but gtk2/3 stuff) using ebuild revision numbers to reflect slots.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2131
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yngwin wrote:
ssuominen wrote:
yngwin wrote:
ssuominen wrote:
Please don't mislead users

I'm not misleading users. I'm just pointing out that the way this is done is unique to the gtk2 vs gtk3 situation.


It's the way other graphical toolkits are also handled, gtk+:1 (for GTK+-1.2), x11-libs/qt-core:4, x11-libs/fox:1.6 (for older FOX), and then down to "base" libraries like libnl:1.1 (old netlink socket lib)

So yeah, own SLOTs are preferred for each API/ABI if sanely possible and required

I'm not aware of anything else (but gtk2/3 stuff) using ebuild revision numbers to reflect slots.


How about KDE 3.x from kde-sunset overlay (but it was in Portage not long ago) where :3 or similar SLOT was used for just about everything, including end applications. I'm sure there are similar cases in the tree.

It's just that the GTK+/GNOME/other maintainers have chosen a saner path of depending on latest toolkit where possible (to avoid the disaster called "gtk2" when GTK+-1.2 was being
replaced)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yngwin
Developer
Developer


Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4394
Location: Suzhou, China

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems you don't understand what I mean.

Quote:
How about KDE 3.x from kde-sunset overlay (but it was in Portage not long ago) where :3 or similar SLOT was used for just about everything, including end applications. I'm sure there are similar cases in the tree.

Those packages didn't/don't use ebuild revision numbers to reflect slotting.

As far as I know—and correct me if I'm wrong, but I've looked and not found anything similar—it is only with gtk+:2 and gtk+:3 where we have other packages (which can be built against both gtk+:2 and gtk+:3) having -r200 and -r300 ebuild revision numbers in their file names to express this slotting, in addition to having the slot set within the ebuild.

This specific way to use ebuild revision numbers to express slotting is unique to the gtk situation and not used elsewhere within Gentoo.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF


Last edited by yngwin on Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:53 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ssuominen
Developer
Developer


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 2131
Location: Finland

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 8:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yngwin wrote:
It seems you don't understand what I mean.

As far as I know—and correct me if I'm wrong, but I've looked and not found anything similar—it is only with gtk+:2 and gtk+:3 where we have other packages (which can be built against both gtk+:2 and gtk+:3) having -r200 and -r300 ebuild revision numbers in their file names to express this slotting, in addition to having the slot set within the ebuild.

This specific way to use ebuild revision numbers to express slotting is unique to the gtk situation and not used elsewhere within Gentoo.


*nod*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sera
Developer
Developer


Joined: 29 Feb 2008
Posts: 992
Location: CET

PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yngwin wrote:
As far as I know—and correct me if I'm wrong, but I've looked and not found anything similar—it is only with gtk+:2 and gtk+:3 where we have other packages (which can be built against both gtk+:2 and gtk+:3) having -r200 and -r300 ebuild revision numbers in their file names to express this slotting, in addition to having the slot set within the ebuild.

This specific way to use ebuild revision numbers to express slotting is unique to the gtk situation and not used elsewhere within Gentoo.


It's not unique, there are other examples like icedtea-web for instance. I agree it's counter intuitive and not how revisions were meant to be used. Unfortunately it's the closest to express this kind of relation.

A better solution most likely involves changing the package name spec. Then we could also add epochs and glep54(scm suffixes) at the same time. :wink:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Installing Gentoo All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
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