| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Lokheed
Veteran
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 1295
Location: /usr/src/linux
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:39 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Only helps you if you are Vietnamese.
_________________
You're not afraid of the dark are you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lokheed
Veteran
Joined: 12 Jul 2004
Posts: 1295
Location: /usr/src/linux
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nuopus wrote: | | Maybe its not working because you are using ~x86 keywords in your make.conf which is a BAD idea. You should be adding app specific keywods to package.keywords. |
Frankly I tested that during the 2.10 beta days and dont care about help docs. It is my fault for shooting off my mouth on something that I tested eons ago, but I also test the firefox nightlies and I dont really want to make an ebuild for them.
I groan when I see people like you start wagging their fingers at people who put ~x86 in their make.conf. I know how to handle my system thanks and I dont care much for when one of the Gentoo devs get around to marking a package either hardmasked or masked by keywords or marked stable. You act like its a huge, educated decision by the devs to pull something off ~x86. Like they did tons of research and calculated everything just for your system to be rock stable.
My system is a dream and I dont need a dev to tell me when a package is "safe." I have seen things like leafpad and evince get hardmasked because 300KB text apps are oh so dangerous to install. Please...hardmask and keywords are for newbies. They serve to deter joe public from really high risk packages and serve to cut down on the bugs filed because lets face it, if every newbie put ~x86 and started hardmasking stuff, the devs could never hope to keep up with the complaints and bugs. Better to leave it to a select few that "dare" to do such a thing. It makes sense having it, but if you know what you are doing, then its not such a BAD idea...
Cheers.
_________________
You're not afraid of the dark are you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
renrutal
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 135
Location: Brazil
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lokheed wrote: | | nuopus wrote: | | Maybe its not working because you are using ~x86 keywords in your make.conf which is a BAD idea. You should be adding app specific keywods to package.keywords. |
Frankly I tested that during the 2.10 beta days and dont care about help docs. It is my fault for shooting off my mouth on something that I tested eons ago, but I also test the firefox nightlies and I dont really want to make an ebuild for them.
I groan when I see people like you start wagging their fingers at people who put ~x86 in their make.conf. I know how to handle my system thanks and I dont care much for when one of the Gentoo devs get around to marking a package either hardmasked or masked by keywords or marked stable. You act like its a huge, educated decision by the devs to pull something off ~x86. Like they did tons of research and calculated everything just for your system to be rock stable.
My system is a dream and I dont need a dev to tell me when a package is "safe." I have seen things like leafpad and evince get hardmasked because 300KB text apps are oh so dangerous to install. Please...hardmask and keywords are for newbies. They serve to deter joe public from really high risk packages and serve to cut down on the bugs filed because lets face it, if every newbie put ~x86 and started hardmasking stuff, the devs could never hope to keep up with the complaints and bugs. Better to leave it to a select few that "dare" to do such a thing. It makes sense having it, but if you know what you are doing, then its not such a BAD idea...
Cheers. |
I'd agree with you many months ago but one day I found an unstable xorg-x11. It was like the computer equivalent of that girl in The Exorcist movie.
But to tell the truth not even x86 is stable enough. Samba wanted to break the sandbox everytime I emerged it, and I have a full "stable" x86 system. Shit happens in Portage, and it's not rare. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuopus
n00b
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 62
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 6:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lokheed wrote: | | nuopus wrote: | | Maybe its not working because you are using ~x86 keywords in your make.conf which is a BAD idea. You should be adding app specific keywods to package.keywords. |
Frankly I tested that during the 2.10 beta days and dont care about help docs. It is my fault for shooting off my mouth on something that I tested eons ago, but I also test the firefox nightlies and I dont really want to make an ebuild for them.
I groan when I see people like you start wagging their fingers at people who put ~x86 in their make.conf. I know how to handle my system thanks and I dont care much for when one of the Gentoo devs get around to marking a package either hardmasked or masked by keywords or marked stable. You act like its a huge, educated decision by the devs to pull something off ~x86. Like they did tons of research and calculated everything just for your system to be rock stable.
My system is a dream and I dont need a dev to tell me when a package is "safe." I have seen things like leafpad and evince get hardmasked because 300KB text apps are oh so dangerous to install. Please...hardmask and keywords are for newbies. They serve to deter joe public from really high risk packages and serve to cut down on the bugs filed because lets face it, if every newbie put ~x86 and started hardmasking stuff, the devs could never hope to keep up with the complaints and bugs. Better to leave it to a select few that "dare" to do such a thing. It makes sense having it, but if you know what you are doing, then its not such a BAD idea...
Cheers. |
Woooooo what a bitter bitter bitter man. Anyway, I didnt know your experience. I was simply making a suggestion that helps lots of people new to Gentoo. Lots of people at the school I work at put ~x86 in their make.conf because of the suggestion of someone else and they end up getting packages that either dont build right or software that is glitchy and is fixed by just removing the ~x86 from the keywords statement.
That suggestion works for some people and not for others ... if it doesnt work for you, then thats find, but that suggestion just may have helped someone. You never know.
What I can't stand are uppedy people who think they are superior to everyone else and get mad at the slightest criticism or get mad when someone suggests something they already know. We all post here to either get help or help other people. Getting mad and flaming someone for posting a suggestion that has helped others is not helping anyone. Maybe you can ask someone to help you off your high horse? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lukeb
n00b
Joined: 20 Aug 2005
Posts: 18
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 6:49 am Post subject: I tried to follow th |
|
|
I tried to follow the guide but it doesn't seem to be working. I had to manually update my /etc/portage/package.keywords (from here) however when I run "emerge gnome", it doesnt seem to update gnome to 2.12? Any ideas?
Thanks,
Luke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lightvhawk0
Guru
Joined: 07 Nov 2003
Posts: 388
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ptitoine wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | cat /usr/portage/gnome-base/gnome-light/gnome-light-2.10.ebuild |
that's not very light with a mozilla dependance  |
gnome-extra/yelp-2.10.0 -debug +firefox
ummm USE="firefox"  that should take care of the mozilla depency
_________________
If God has made us in his image, we have returned him the favor. - Voltaire |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Azaze1
n00b
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| A question about the firefox USE flag, is that for the database "firefox" or the webrowser "firefox"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blue.sca
l33t
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Posts: 680
Location: Mainz, Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
it's the webbrowser since the database is called firebird :)
_________________
geek by nature, linux by choice
i want my avatar back... thank you
:wq |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hyp0r
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 139
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yet another waiting odyssey for x86... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loki99
Advocate
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 2056
Location: Vienna, €urope
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:20 am Post subject: Re: I tried to follow th |
|
|
| lukeb wrote: | I tried to follow the guide but it doesn't seem to be working. I had to manually update my /etc/portage/package.keywords (from here) however when I run "emerge gnome", it doesnt seem to update gnome to 2.12? Any ideas?
Thanks,
Luke |
| Quote: | bash-2.05b# etcat -v gnome
[ Results for search key : gnome ]
[ Candidate applications found : 7 ]
Only printing found installed programs.
* gnome-base/gnome :
[ ] 1.4-r3 (1.4)
[ ] 2.8.2 (2.0)
[ ] 2.8.3-r1 (2.0)
[ ] 2.10-r1 (2.0)
[ ] 2.10.1 (2.0)
[ ] 2.10.2 (2.0)
[M~ ] 2.12_rc1 (2.0) |
Gnome-2.12 is still hardmasked! You need to also edit your "/etc/portage/package.unmask".
You might want to take a look at A Portage Introduction
Last edited by loki99 on Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:25 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loki99
Advocate
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 2056
Location: Vienna, €urope
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lokheed wrote: | | ... Please...hardmask and keywords are for newbies... |
That is just hilarious! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ptitoine
n00b
Joined: 13 May 2003
Posts: 54
Location: Nantes, France
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
that's not the final 2.12 
_________________
IBM T40p Gentooed  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ikshaar
Veteran
Joined: 23 Jul 2002
Posts: 1339
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blue.sca wrote: | | i just can't believe that there is no information about a package hierachie on gnome.org or that it is just so hard to find. all i want is to strip down gnome to a bare minimal and then build thing up just like i did with the whole linux installation with gentoo. |
All the dependencies of Gnome are listed in the ebuild itself !! Gnome is a desktop. A "bare minimal" does not make sense... Now if you want to tweak it to your taste and have only certain parts of it, there is no mind-reader yet... you have to do it yourself. Use the gnome-light or gnome ebuild as a base to start...
_________________
"May God stands between you and harm in all the empty places where you must walk" - Babylon 5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blue.sca
l33t
Joined: 28 Aug 2003
Posts: 680
Location: Mainz, Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
but i want to have those dependencies from the developers themselves. someone has to know what can be left out in the environment and what's important for gnome to work properly. who made the gnome-light ebuild and how did he do it? did he just comment out some dependencies and tried if it compiles and runs? or did he have any information about the steps and if so, where are those from?
_________________
geek by nature, linux by choice
i want my avatar back... thank you
:wq |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neuron
Advocate
Joined: 28 May 2002
Posts: 2371
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wow, what an unmask, gnome-2.12 needs new hald/dbus, and cairo.
in case anyone is as lazy as me when it comes to finding unmasks:
| Code: |
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -p gnome | grep -v 'block' | grep 'ebuild' | cut -d']' -f 2 | cut -d'[' -f1| cut -c2- | xargs -i echo =\{\}
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nxsty
Veteran
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 1556
Location: .se
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I tried unmasking gnome 2.12 today but a lot of deps where still the devel versions (2.11). I'm going to wait a couple of days before I emerge it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ibaun
n00b
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, and one of those deps, file-roller 2.11.92, tries to break out of sandbox :/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Roy
n00b
Joined: 15 Apr 2002
Posts: 55
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think if you want 2.12 final you have to use 'break my gentoo'.
I managed to get all of gnome installed except yelp and gnome-vfs. Yelp I don't care so much about. For gnome-vfs I managed to get 2.11.92 (or something) and I figure that is good enough for the moment
_________________
/* Halley */
(Halley's comment.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spindley
n00b
Joined: 02 Aug 2005
Posts: 48
Location: Calgary, AB Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, my first build error compiling unmasked Gnome is with openldap-2.2.28-r1.
| Code: | cc -march=athlon-xp -O3 -pipe -I../../include -I../../include -DLDAP_LIBRARY -c ntlm.c -fPIC -o .libs/ntlm.o
ntlm.c: In function `ldap_ntlm_bind':
ntlm.c:77: error: too few arguments to function `ldap_send_initial_request'
make[2]: *** [ntlm.lo] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/mike/tmp/portage/openldap-2.2.28-r1/work/openldap-2.2.28/libraries/libldap'
make[1]: *** [all-common] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/mike/tmp/portage/openldap-2.2.28-r1/work/openldap-2.2.28/libraries'
make: *** [all-common] Error 1
!!! ERROR: net-nds/openldap-2.2.28-r1 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 246, Exitcode 2
!!! make failed
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
|
Any ideas?
_________________
"Wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
neuron
Advocate
Joined: 28 May 2002
Posts: 2371
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yeah, dont run the ~x86/~amd64 version of it, stable should work fine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuopus
n00b
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 62
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| loki99 wrote: | | Lokheed wrote: | | ... Please...hardmask and keywords are for newbies... |
That is just hilarious! |
SHHHHHH!!! He will probably "groan" when someone starts to laugh and "point fingers" at his post. He is the all supreme l33t Gentoo master who has no use for masks and keywords! We are all lesser beings compared to his shadowy greatness ... his masculine vi editing brovado and his unwavering braveness in face of compile bugs!!!
PS: And for all scratching their head thinking .. WTH .. it was sarcasm to a previous post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cerebus_k
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Jun 2003
Posts: 173
Location: Flower Mound, Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| spindley wrote: | Well, my first build error compiling unmasked Gnome is with openldap-2.2.28-r1.
| Code: | cc -march=athlon-xp -O3 -pipe -I../../include -I../../include -DLDAP_LIBRARY -c ntlm.c -fPIC -o .libs/ntlm.o
ntlm.c: In function `ldap_ntlm_bind':
ntlm.c:77: error: too few arguments to function `ldap_send_initial_request'
make[2]: *** [ntlm.lo] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/mike/tmp/portage/openldap-2.2.28-r1/work/openldap-2.2.28/libraries/libldap'
make[1]: *** [all-common] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/mike/tmp/portage/openldap-2.2.28-r1/work/openldap-2.2.28/libraries'
make: *** [all-common] Error 1
!!! ERROR: net-nds/openldap-2.2.28-r1 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 246, Exitcode 2
!!! make failed
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
|
Any ideas? |
I'm getting the same error and I'm not trying to emerge Gnome 2.12. I do have "~x86" in my make.conf though.
_________________
Gettin old isn't for wimps |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loki99
Advocate
Joined: 10 Oct 2003
Posts: 2056
Location: Vienna, €urope
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nuopus wrote: |
SHHHHHH!!! He will probably "groan" when someone starts to laugh and "point fingers" at his post. He is the all supreme l33t Gentoo master who has no use for masks and keywords! We are all lesser beings compared to his shadowy greatness ... his masculine vi editing brovado and his unwavering braveness in face of compile bugs!!!
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ClieX
n00b
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 44
Location: Europe/Moscow
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have trouble:
| Code: |
b\" -DGNOME_VFS_SYSCONFDIR=\"/etc\" -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\"gnome-vfs-modules\" -march=athlon-xp -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -c -o tar-method.lo `test -f 'tar-method.c' || echo './'`tar-method.c
make[2]: *** [smb-method.lo] Error 1
make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -I.. -I../imported/neon -pthread -DORBIT2=1 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/libxml2 -I/usr/include/gconf/2 -I/usr/include/orbit-2.0 -pthread -DORBIT2=1 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/gconf/2 -I/usr/include/orbit-2.0 -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_BSD_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -D_REENTRANT -DSSH_PROGRAM=\"/usr/bin/ssh\" -DG_DISABLE_DEPRECATED -DGNOME_VFS_PREFIX=\"/usr\" -DGNOME_VFS_DATADIR=\"/usr/share\" -DGNOME_VFS_LIBDIR=\"/usr/lib\" -DGNOME_VFS_SYSCONFDIR=\"/etc\" -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\"gnome-vfs-modules\" -march=athlon-xp -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -c tar-method.c -MT tar-method.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/tar-method.TPlo -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/tar-method.o
i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -I.. -I../imported/neon -pthread -DORBIT2=1 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/libxml2 -I/usr/include/gconf/2 -I/usr/include/orbit-2.0 -pthread -DORBIT2=1 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/gconf/2 -I/usr/include/orbit-2.0 -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_BSD_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS -D_REENTRANT -DSSH_PROGRAM=\"/usr/bin/ssh\" -DG_DISABLE_DEPRECATED -DGNOME_VFS_PREFIX=\"/usr\" -DGNOME_VFS_DATADIR=\"/usr/share\" -DGNOME_VFS_LIBDIR=\"/usr/lib\" -DGNOME_VFS_SYSCONFDIR=\"/etc\" -DG_LOG_DOMAIN=\"gnome-vfs-modules\" -march=athlon-xp -O3 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -c tar-method.c -MT tar-method.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/tar-method.TPlo -o tar-method.o >/dev/null 2>&1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-vfs-2.12.0/work/gnome-vfs-2.12.0/modules'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/gnome-vfs-2.12.0/work/gnome-vfs-2.12.0'
make: *** [all] Error 2
!!! ERROR: gnome-base/gnome-vfs-2.12.0 failed.
!!! Function gnome2_src_compile, Line 48, Exitcode 2
!!! compile failure
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
|
Ideas?
_________________
Gentoo Base System version 1.6.13, Stage 1/3 with NPTL,UTF-8
GCC 3.4.4-r1, GLIBC 2.3.5-r1, 2.6.13.2-nitro1
GNOME 2.12 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unz
l33t
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 819
Location: Roma, Italia
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 08, 2005 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
enable samba USE, or catch the patch from breakmygentoo
_________________
Ma che c'hai là? Sulla spalla!!!! http://lascimmia.it/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Desktop Environments
