| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rob_dot_p
n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 30
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Doctor
Moderator
Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2678
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
This is a build time vs run time thing. If you look at the ebuild COMMON_DEPEND="...sys-apps/dbus:=..." means that it links against dbus at build time. This is unavoidable without major patches. The dev responsible made the run time dependencies the same as the build time deps plus a few others.
Perhaps this is a bit lazy but you can really see why. You wouldn't necessarily want to go testing 100s of different obscure system configurations. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if it where an unsupported configuration.
_________________
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 |
|
|
rob_dot_p
n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 30
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Doctor wrote: | The dev responsible made the run time dependencies the same as the build time deps plus a few others.
|
Ah, you're right, for some reason I didn't even look at the ebuild, that was stupid when asking a question about dependencies, thanks 
Do you think it makes sense to contact the maintainer or is this just unnecessary noise?
Is a system without dbus really that exotic on a distro which doesn't default to systemd? I have masked dbus for quite some time and I'm running a fairly 'normal' desktop imo.
I know there's some popular software out there which relies on it but I assume a lot of people who use Gentoo don't run a full-fledged Gnome-Shell or KDE desktop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Moderator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 21633
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
I see no harm in politely inquiring whether the dependency is required or was done out of convenience. In my opinion, controversial dependencies ought to include a comment in the ebuild stating their purpose:- mandatory to avoid build failure
- mandatory to avoid runtime failure (but package would seem to build correctly without it)
- mandatory to get support from upstream (but package seems to work)
- mandatory for certain popular features (e.g. maybe playing sound does not work when the dependency is absent)
- not known mandatory, but present to reduce the testing matrix
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Doctor
Moderator
Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 2678
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Is a system without dbus really that exotic on a distro which doesn't default to systemd? I have masked dbus for quite some time and I'm running a fairly 'normal' desktop imo. |
It seems to be from a development point of view. I've been trying to kill it off and on for a while but key parts of my system keep depending on it. Chromium and my hp printer driver, for example.
_________________
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 |
|
|
charles17
Advocate
Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 3664
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rob_dot_p
n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 30
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm actually using your overlay, thank you  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
charles17
Advocate
Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 3664
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rob_dot_p
n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 30
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2017 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry I misread that.
I guess I'll just add a local overlay, remove dbus from the runtime dependencies and see how it works.
I'll report back after I have tested it for some time in case somebody else is interested . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tld
Veteran
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Posts: 1816
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2017 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Doctor wrote: | | Quote: | | Is a system without dbus really that exotic on a distro which doesn't default to systemd? I have masked dbus for quite some time and I'm running a fairly 'normal' desktop imo. |
It seems to be from a development point of view. I've been trying to kill it off and on for a while but key parts of my system keep depending on it. Chromium and my hp printer driver, for example. |
I'm still stuck with it on this older system primarily because I'm using a few binary packages (thundrbird-bin and libreoffice-bin). Even without that dbus can be like getting rid of lice frankly...very annoying. When I had an HP printer I went through that same crap. It wasn't supposed to require it, but simply failed without it...very annoying. I've managed to get rid of it on my MythTV frontend and backend as per this:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580856
However I just recently had to remove the tools USE flag from nvidia-drivers (thus loosing nvidia-settings), because they suddenly added a hard dependency on it as of nvidia-drivers-381.x...also annoying. The screwy part is that, as far as I know, none of the dependencies I've ever been stuck with actually required ever starting the dbus service at all...ffs.
For me the grand daddy of silly build time dependencies is qtwebkit in qt5, which requires ruby of all things for the build only!...and entire language ffs. Someone got lazy to the point of insanity on whatever that's about.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr.Willy
Guru
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
Posts: 547
Location: NRW, Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2017 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tld wrote: | | For me the grand daddy of silly build time dependencies is qtwebkit in qt5, which requires ruby of all things for the build only!...and entire language ffs. Someone got lazy to the point of insanity on whatever that's about. |
At one point it actually required two different versions of ruby at the same time.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rob_dot_p
n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 30
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good find.
One thing; in the musl-headers patch, the first change looks like it would lose the X11 include. Maybe something like this, instead: | Code: | #ifdef OS_LINUX
#ifdef __GLIBC__
#include <gnu/libc-version.h>
#endif
#ifndef OS_CHROMEOS
#include "base/version.h"
#ifdef USE_X11
#include "ui/base/x/x11_util.h"
#endif
#endif /* !OS_CHROMEOS */
#endif /* OS_LINUX */ |
Though IDK what's in "base/version.h" ofc; might not have showed up as its metrics (browser/metrics/chrome_browser_main_extra_parts_metrics.cc) on musl. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rob_dot_p
n00b
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 30
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
