Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Is udisks really needed for kde-frameworks/solid?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Desktop Environments
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mi_unixbird
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 102

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 5:26 pm    Post subject: Is udisks really needed for kde-frameworks/solid? Reply with quote

What kept me from upgrading to KDE5 applications for a long time was that at least on Gentoo it would pull in consolekit, dconf, policykit, udisks and a bunch of other things. I've been getting conflicting messages about whether or not that's all needed from both Gentoo devs and upstream KDE contributors. I've now localized this to what is seemingly one line in that kde-frameworks/solid depends on udisks.

I've since made a local ebuild inside a local overlay which swaps that with "udisks? ( sys-fs/fs-udisks )" and solid built without udisks on my system and I've upgraded a few KDE applications to KDE5 thusfar and they seem to work thusfar without any hastle.

So is there really any reason that on Gentoo solid needs to hard-depend nonoptionally on udisks or is this an oversight in the ebuild that should be fixed?
_________________
execctl --path exec filectl --current-directory list
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ant P.
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 5914

PostPosted: Wed May 11, 2016 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's probably more a case of there being so many dependencies the ebuild maintainers couldn't be bothered going through and making them all optional. KDE takes far too long to compile *one* time, testing combinations of USE flags would be impossible.

At least it doesn't sound as bad as the GNOME side of the wall, where unnecessary deps like those really are hardcoded for no good reason...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mi_unixbird
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 102

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 7:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems to me that it should still be put in ~arch though for some testing. If you don't do this you lose half the benefit of running Gentoo.

I've been running Kate, Dolphin, KSysguard and Konsole for a short day now without any problems without udisks. Maybe I'll run into something though. But being able to do this is sort of the point of Gentoo so not checking for it seems weird.
_________________
execctl --path exec filectl --current-directory list
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chiitoo
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 1828
Location: Here and Away Again

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 9:36 am    Post subject: ><)))°€ Reply with quote

These things are more or less the reason why I'm not using “KDEKFP5”.

I first gave it a go ages, if not months ago, and when I tried to strip this stuff off, it didn't seem so simple because everything would trigger a failure at configure time already if they were missing, meaning some patching would have been required. Perhaps it's time to give it a go again, seeing your results with the solid ebuild. ^^

The people working on these on Gentoo are very open to making things optional, but I believe it's not something they go out of their way to test and make happen. I'm horrible at getting things done (and got lots of other stuff waiting), so I haven't really got to it yet either... one day though! One day...

Thanks for sharing your experiences on this!
_________________
Kind Regards,
The Noob Unlimited


You might remember me from Gentoo projects such as Forums, LXQt, Qt, and Wine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
asturm
Developer
Developer


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 7132
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If upstream declares it required at runtime, then Gentoo won't omit it from dependencies. Also, there is still no proper way for optional runtime deps in portage.
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mi_unixbird
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 102

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

genstorm wrote:
If upstream declares it required at runtime, then Gentoo won't omit it from dependencies. Also, there is still no proper way for optional runtime deps in portage.


Where has upstream declared it required at runtime?

This page at the very least seems to imply it to be optional.

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/kde/krameworks5.html
_________________
execctl --path exec filectl --current-directory list
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
asturm
Developer
Developer


Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 7132
Location: Austria

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's not upstream, that's linuxfromscratch. I don't really know the current stance of upstream, but I do remember a big discussion in KDE4 times on the matter.

EDIT: When I look at the source, there seems to be a switch on the basis of UDEV found for building that and the UDISKS backend. Not known is whether affected depending packages actually have runtime checks for the (non-)availability of those, though.
_________________
backend.cpp:92:2: warning: #warning TODO - this error message is about as useful as a cooling unit in the arctic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Doctor
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2600

PostPosted: Thu May 12, 2016 5:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can hack together your own ebuild to see if omitting it causes any problems. That is the best part about Gentoo. You are free to experiment. Just keep in mind that if it breaks you get to keep the pieces.

I did this for a while on KDE4. I was completely *kit-less and u[power/disk]-less. I had to hack a few e-builds, but it worked. Completely unsupported of course.
_________________
First things first, but not necessarily in that order.

Apologies if I take a while to respond. I'm currently working on the dematerialization circuit for my blue box.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mi_unixbird
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Posts: 102

PostPosted: Fri May 13, 2016 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

genstorm wrote:
That's not upstream, that's linuxfromscratch. I don't really know the current stance of upstream, but I do remember a big discussion in KDE4 times on the matter.
Yeah, I meant to say that LFS saying it was optional implied it to be unless they make it up, not that LFS is upstream.

Quote:
EDIT: When I look at the source, there seems to be a switch on the basis of UDEV found for building that and the UDISKS backend. Not known is whether affected depending packages actually have runtime checks for the (non-)availability of those, though.


Got any pointers to add the switch to the ebuild? Since right now looking at the build log it builds the upower, udisks and udev backend but just does runtime checks to see if they are there, I'd like to be clean and not build the upower and udisks backend at all.

Strangely, no upower dependency though.

The Doctor wrote:
You can hack together your own ebuild to see if omitting it causes any problems. That is the best part about Gentoo. You are free to experiment. Just keep in mind that if it breaks you get to keep the pieces.

I did this for a while on KDE4. I was completely *kit-less and u[power/disk]-less. I had to hack a few e-builds, but it worked. Completely unsupported of course.


The difference is I suppose that with KDE currently it is supported via a USE flag to turn all that on. I ran KDE4 applications kitless and upower/udiskless without any troubles and without modifying any ebuilds.
_________________
execctl --path exec filectl --current-directory list
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Desktop Environments 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