Re: [gentoo-user] Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On Fri, 02 Aug 2013 23:03:13 -0400, Harry Putnam wrote: emerge -vp dev-vcs/git and come up with 194 pkgs that need to be installed. emerge -tp dev-vcs/git should show you what it pulling in which packages, then you can tweak your USE flags. It is quite possible, even likely, that this is caused by a USE flag of one of the dependencies rather than git itself. -- Neil Bothwick I have seen things you lusers would not believe. I've seen Sun monitors on fire off the side of the multimedia lab. I've seen NTU lights glitter in the dark near the Mail Gate. All these things will be lost in time, like the root partition last week. Time to die. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Where to find the straight dope conf.d/net?
On Saturday 03 Aug 2013 06:52:46 Harry Putnam wrote: I was off gentoo for a few mnths... apparently something has changed in the naming of the network devices. So far I've read several accounts of it... but the install handbook has apparently not been brought up to date. Doing a fresh install, and following the contents of the manual concerning conf.d/net... is not working, of course. Renaming the device in /etc/init.d to net.enp0s3 and using that name in conf.d/net doesn't work either. At least not during boot. I can start the network by hand with /etc/init.d/net.enp0s3 start No problems there. But what, exactly, is supposed to go in conf.d/net? I've found quite a lot of confusing information on google but not a solution that works for me. If I start the network by hand as above then things like sshd blow up from trying to restart them again and using the wrong names. Can someone point me to concise documentation about how this new setup is supposed to work? In /etc/conf.d/net you should replace the previously named eth0 directives to your new NIC name, e.g. instead of: config_eth0=dhcp you will use the new name: config_enp0s3=dhcp and so on. For more details on the parameters used look at: /usr/share/doc/openrc-0.11.8/net.example.bz2 -- Regards, Mick smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Where to find the straight dope conf.d/net?
On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 11:51:31 +0100, Mick wrote: Can someone point me to concise documentation about how this new setup is supposed to work? In /etc/conf.d/net you should replace the previously named eth0 directives to your new NIC name, e.g. instead of: config_eth0=dhcp you will use the new name: config_enp0s3=dhcp Or add net.ifnames=0 to your kernel boot options to keep the old naming style. -- Neil Bothwick In the 60's people took acid to make the world weird. Now the world is weird and people take Prozac to make it normal. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 08:34:11PM +0100, Steven J. Long wrote: Again you're wilfully misinterpreting what I've said, and answering a completely different point. You didn't know the basics of how to go about approaching Gentoo. Stuff that practically every user knows, or can find out *very* easily: much more easily than the documentation they end up searching to do an install and maintain their machine/s. Again, if you cba to do that basic groundwork, wtf do you expect? Oh yes, us all to fall over ourselves and fete you with discussion about how wonderful you are, and how lucky we'd be if you only deigned to contribute some of your wisdom to us mere mortals. So much so that we ignore all the usual metrics, and take your email as gospel truth, that overrides whether you are actually a good fit for Gentoo, or even whether you can lookup docs on a website, let alone have actually contributed as part of the community. Good luck with that approach, and your current projects. While I (and others BTW) was trying to provide an external POV with points to make outside contributions and rectruitement more efficient, you guys @gentoo.org turned this thread into plain bullshits. Starting with a statement like Please note I'm not discussing any technical ability you may or may not have. does not allow you to make the exact opposite and being insulting or border-line in the rest of your mails. I don't remember I ever faced to such direct and personal judgments in the open source world. Oh, I know you pretend it's not. So, I'm on my way, dear, in order to: - learn how to approach a community (stuff that practically every user knows); - learn where to find the doc and read it; - learn all the basics; - not magnify myself. Thank you for all the smart feedbacks. Obvisously, it was all about me. F**k I want to believe you don't embody the dominant POV of the Gentoo maintainers about the original topic. / I'm going serioulsy tired of this thread. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
[gentoo-user] Re: Any .config for vbox gentoo guest
walt w41...@gmail.com writes: On 07/29/2013 06:29 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Can anyone post a .config for a 3.8.13 kernel that is known to work on a vbox install of gentoo as guest. Working on a fresh install but don't have gentoo running anywhere to rob a .config from. This one worked for me. Thanks... yup, worked here too, with a few minor changes. Makes a good start.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 2013-08-03 14:28, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 08:34:11PM +0100, Steven J. Long wrote: While I (and others BTW) was trying to provide an external POV with points to make outside contributions and rectruitement more efficient, you guys @gentoo.org turned this thread into plain bullshits. Please note that the one you replied to (Steven J. Long) does not have a @gentoo.org email address... I haven't followed this thread closely but I think the gentoo devs (and others) deserves respect for their hard work, mostly(?) without pay. I may not like the direction where some things are going (udev, systemd) but it's the best thing we got for now (portage, openrc), imho. Best regards Peter K
[gentoo-user] Re: Where to find the straight dope conf.d/net?
Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com writes: On Saturday 03 Aug 2013 06:52:46 Harry Putnam wrote: I was off gentoo for a few mnths... apparently something has changed in the naming of the network devices. So far I've read several accounts of it... but the install handbook has apparently not been brought up to date. Doing a fresh install, and following the contents of the manual concerning conf.d/net... is not working, of course. Renaming the device in /etc/init.d to net.enp0s3 and using that name in conf.d/net doesn't work either. At least not during boot. I can start the network by hand with /etc/init.d/net.enp0s3 start No problems there. But what, exactly, is supposed to go in conf.d/net? I've found quite a lot of confusing information on google but not a solution that works for me. If I start the network by hand as above then things like sshd blow up from trying to restart them again and using the wrong names. Can someone point me to concise documentation about how this new setup is supposed to work? In /etc/conf.d/net you should replace the previously named eth0 directives to your new NIC name, e.g. instead of: config_eth0=dhcp you will use the new name: config_enp0s3=dhcp Well, yeah, thanks. Of course, that was the first thing I tried... and it does start the interface. From /etc/conf.d/net: , | # config_eth0=192.168.1.22 netmask 255.255.255.0 brd 192.168.1.255 | # routes_eth0=default via 192.168.1.1 | | config_enp0s3=192.168.1.22/24 | routes_enp0s3=default via 192.168.1.1 ` However any attempt to start sshd tries to call eth0 instead of enp0s3. But I finally discovered I still had an net.eth0 in /etc/init.d... once I removed that, leaving only net.enp0s3... it all began to work... Thanks again.
[gentoo-user] Re: Where to find the straight dope conf.d/net?
Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk writes: On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 11:51:31 +0100, Mick wrote: Can someone point me to concise documentation about how this new setup is supposed to work? In /etc/conf.d/net you should replace the previously named eth0 directives to your new NIC name, e.g. instead of: config_eth0=dhcp you will use the new name: config_enp0s3=dhcp Or add net.ifnames=0 to your kernel boot options to keep the old naming style. Thanks, good to know, and I saw that while googling too, but kind of figured it would just be postponing the changes Still though, doesn't it seem like the 'Quick Installation' document and for that matter, the Handbook... should be edited to reflect this major change... even if it was just adding a url that explains how to work with the new stuff? Is there a single document somewhere that explains what this is all about and how to configure for it? Well, yes there is. There was a document from eselect news about it... During install it was 'eselect news read 4' , | 2013-03-29-udev-upgrade | Title Upgrading udev to version =200 | AuthorSamuli Suominen ssuomi...@gentoo.org | Posted2013-03-29 | Revision 2 | | [...] ` I read it but didn't really get what changes needed to happen.. now looking back at that document it's hard to see how I could fail to understand, as it is pretty insistent about how your system will be fudge if you don't pay attention. I guess those old ethX names are so deeply ingrained... blah blah. excuse, excuse ... 4 flat tires, ... hit by comet .. blah abducted... rear end probed...blah, etc etc.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On 08/03/2013 02:28 PM, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: you guys @gentoo.org turned this thread into plain bullshits. I have a lot of patience, but that does not help us and definitely not your case either. Please stop. People who are _really_ interested in contributing are welcome to contact me directly as well.
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com writes:
On 03/08/13 06:03, Harry Putnam wrote:
No doubt suffering from overdose of pilot error here but on a new (in
progress) install of gentoo as guest in vbox. I ran the command
emerge -vp dev-vcs/git and come up with 194 pkgs that need to be
installed.
Try disabling all flags and see where that gets you. You can do that
with a single command:
USE=-blksha1 -curl -gpg -iconv -pcre -python -threads -webdav -cgi
-cvs -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gtk -highlight -nls -perl -ppcsha1
-subversion -test -tk -xinetd emerge -p dev-vcs/git
Hehe, alright, now we're talking that reduced dependancies to just
1 lonesome cpio.
,
| vgen ~ # USE=-blksha1 -curl -gpg -iconv -pcre -python -threads
| -webdav -cgi
| -cvs -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gtk -highlight -nls -perl -ppcsha1
| -subversion -test -tk -xinetd emerge -vp dev-vcs/git
|
| These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
|
| Calculating dependencies... done!
| [ebuild N ] app-arch/cpio-2.11-r1 USE=-nls 995 kB
| [ebuild N ] dev-vcs/git-1.8.3.2 USE=-blksha1 -cgi -curl -cvs
| -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gpg -gtk -highlight -iconv -nls -pcre
| -perl (-ppcsha1) -python -subversion {-test} -threads -tk -webdav
| -xinetd PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET=python2_7 -python2_6
| PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 -python2_6 4,900 kB
|
| Total: 2 packages (2 new), Size of downloads: 5,895 kB
`
Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some
horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way.
Re: [gentoo-user] Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On 3 August 2013, at 04:03, Harry Putnam wrote: ... emerge -vp dev-vcs/git and come up with 194 pkgs that need to be installed. ... So I imagine I've done something thats causing that massive of a list of dependencies. I tried a few USE flags like -X and that did drop it down to 187... but jeez still thats a bit off the wall. What profile have you selected, please? Stroller.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On 08/02/2013 08:22 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. Without USE=perl, you'll get a surprise if you try to `git add -i`.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
Am Fri, 02 Aug 2013 20:22:09 -0400
schrieb Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com:
Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com writes:
On 03/08/13 06:03, Harry Putnam wrote:
No doubt suffering from overdose of pilot error here but on a new (in
progress) install of gentoo as guest in vbox. I ran the command
emerge -vp dev-vcs/git and come up with 194 pkgs that need to be
installed.
Try disabling all flags and see where that gets you. You can do that
with a single command:
USE=-blksha1 -curl -gpg -iconv -pcre -python -threads -webdav -cgi
-cvs -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gtk -highlight -nls -perl -ppcsha1
-subversion -test -tk -xinetd emerge -p dev-vcs/git
Hehe, alright, now we're talking that reduced dependancies to just
1 lonesome cpio.
,
| vgen ~ # USE=-blksha1 -curl -gpg -iconv -pcre -python -threads
| -webdav -cgi
| -cvs -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gtk -highlight -nls -perl -ppcsha1
| -subversion -test -tk -xinetd emerge -vp dev-vcs/git
|
| These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
|
| Calculating dependencies... done!
| [ebuild N ] app-arch/cpio-2.11-r1 USE=-nls 995 kB
| [ebuild N ] dev-vcs/git-1.8.3.2 USE=-blksha1 -cgi -curl -cvs
| -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gpg -gtk -highlight -iconv -nls -pcre
| -perl (-ppcsha1) -python -subversion {-test} -threads -tk -webdav
| -xinetd PYTHON_SINGLE_TARGET=python2_7 -python2_6
| PYTHON_TARGETS=python2_7 -python2_6 4,900 kB
|
| Total: 2 packages (2 new), Size of downloads: 5,895 kB
`
Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some
horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way.
I think that depends entirely on how exactly you plan on using git, for example:
- python and perl seem to control additional python and perl packages, but
they are also used by some commit hooks and scripts
- tk is required for the gitk GUI (which is useful for browsing history)
- gpg is required for gpg commit signing
- cvs and subversion are only needed for the git-cvs and git-svn commands
Otherwise, I'm not entirely sure what you would be missing through such, uh,
radical minimalism ;) ; equery uses git is your friend for some of the
other flags, e.g., curl is required for http[s]:// repository URLs.
HTH
--
Marc Joliet
--
People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't - Bjarne Stroustrup
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Recommendation for CPU type in QEMU?
Am Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:12:01 +0100 schrieb Kerin Millar kerfra...@fastmail.co.uk: On 31/07/2013 12:31, Marc Joliet wrote: [snip] There's also -cpu host, which simply passes your CPU through to the guest. That's what I use for my 32 bit WinXP VM. You can use it if you don't mind not being able to migrate your guest, but it sounds to me like you're doing this on a desktop machine, so I suspect guest migration doesn't matter to you. I thought the same until very recently but it's not the case. The -cpu host feature exposes all feature bits supported by qemu. Those may include features that aren't supported in hardware by the host CPU, in which case qemu has to resort to (slow) emulation if they are used. --Kerin Just a follow up: the most authoritative answer I could find is this: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.kvm.devel/84227/focus=90541 Furthermore, the Linux KVM tuning page also defines -cpu host as I understand it: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Tuning_KVM From the above I conclude that -cpu host should *not* activate CPU features that the host CPU does not support. Otherwise I could only find out the following: - the Gentoo and Arch wikis both recommend -cpu host in conjunction with KVM (see, e.g., http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/QEMU/Options) - in contrast, http://wiki.qemu.org/Features/CPUModels#-cpu_host_vs_-cpu_best seems to match your statement - some guy on serverfault.com says this (http://serverfault.com/questions/404195/kvm-which-cpu-features-make-vms-run-better): Qemu doesn't work in the same way many other hypervisors do. For starters, it can provide full emulation. That means you can run x86 code on an ARM processor, for example. When in KVM mode, as you're using it, it doesn't actually do that... the processor is exposed no matter what, but what is reported to the OS will be changed by the -cpu flag. If that's correct, -cpu host might mean different things when in KVM mode vs. when not. However I'm not going to blindly trust that statement. How/where did you find out that -cpu host also exposes non-host CPU features? -- Marc Joliet -- People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don't - Bjarne Stroustrup signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
2013/8/3 Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com: Hehe, alright, now we're talking that reduced dependancies to just 1 lonesome cpio. Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. IIRC you only have to do USE=-perl and most dependencies will be gone... I distantly recall the last time I installed git on one of my server nodes most packages pulled in was in the form virtual/perl-* and perl-*/*, i.e. CPAN packages. However, according to the ebuild, you need USE=perl set if you want to enable subversion support or something funnier like CGI, so you'd probably have to consider this whole thing a little bit more before drawing your conclusion...
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 03:20:27PM +0200, pk wrote: On 2013-08-03 14:28, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 08:34:11PM +0100, Steven J. Long wrote: While I (and others BTW) was trying to provide an external POV with points to make outside contributions and rectruitement more efficient, you guys @gentoo.org turned this thread into plain bullshits. Please note that the one you replied to (Steven J. Long) does not have a @gentoo.org email address... Ah, right. Sorry for that. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
Stroller strol...@stellar.eclipse.co.uk writes: On 3 August 2013, at 04:03, Harry Putnam wrote: ... emerge -vp dev-vcs/git and come up with 194 pkgs that need to be installed. ... So I imagine I've done something thats causing that massive of a list of dependencies. I tried a few USE flags like -X and that did drop it down to 187... but jeez still thats a bit off the wall. What profile have you selected, please? Stroller. ../../usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/x86/13.0/desktop And I will be using a desktop eventually but not now... and when I do it will be one of light ones like openbox or such.
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
Wang Xuerui idontknw.w...@gmail.com writes: 2013/8/3 Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com: Hehe, alright, now we're talking that reduced dependancies to just 1 lonesome cpio. Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. IIRC you only have to do USE=-perl and most dependencies will be gone... I distantly recall the last time I installed git on one of my server nodes most packages pulled in was in the form virtual/perl-* and perl-*/*, i.e. CPAN packages. However, according to the ebuild, you need USE=perl set if you want to enable subversion support or something funnier like CGI, so you'd probably have to consider this whole thing a little bit more before drawing your conclusion... Well, I see leaving perl, python and curl alone, or that is, NOT including -perl -python -curl, still knocks it down to less than half of the 194... at 79 pkgs. The vast majority are virtual/perl or other perl pkgs... so not much data wise. So, anyway, thinking I'll go with USE=-blksha1 -gpg -iconv -pcre -threads -webdav -cgi -cvs -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gtk -highlight -nls -ppcsha1 -subversion -test -tk -xinetd emerge -v dev-vcs/git Unless I hear something that would indicate it will be too crippled even for the usage I plan.
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com writes: On 08/02/2013 08:22 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. Without USE=perl, you'll get a surprise if you try to `git add -i`. Well, I do have perl installed so if its just a matter of having perl available then wouldn't it still work? --- --- ---=--- --- --- Marc Joliet mar...@gmx.de writes: [...] Harry wrote: Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. Marc replied: I think that depends entirely on how exactly you plan on using git, for example: - python and perl seem to control additional python and perl packages, but they are also used by some commit hooks and scripts - tk is required for the gitk GUI (which is useful for browsing history) - gpg is required for gpg commit signing - cvs and subversion are only needed for the git-cvs and git-svn commands Otherwise, I'm not entirely sure what you would be missing through such, uh, radical minimalism ;) ; equery uses git is your friend for some of the other flags, e.g., curl is required for http[s]:// repository URLs. Thanks for the walkthru... My main reason to install git is to clone sources for emacs and gnus... emacs actually uses bazaar, but there is a git mirror of the bazaar repo. Wang Xuerui idontknw.w...@gmail.com writes: 2013/8/3 Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com: Hehe, alright, now we're talking that reduced dependancies to just 1 lonesome cpio. Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. IIRC you only have to do USE=-perl and most dependencies will be gone... I distantly recall the last time I installed git on one of my server nodes most packages pulled in was in the form virtual/perl-* and perl-*/*, i.e. CPAN packages. However, according to the ebuild, you need USE=perl set if you want to enable subversion support or something funnier like CGI, so you'd probably have to consider this whole thing a little bit more before drawing your conclusion... OK, makes sense. So given that my main (probably only) use of git is to access devel brances of emacs and gnus... maybe a few other things. That might entail backing out a particularly buggy version for an earlier one or such. And that I will actually only 'lightly' be using git for its intended version control purpose. I will be doing my own version control of a few scripts and etc with mercurial, and mercurial shows no deps whatever with: emerge -vp mercurial
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On 03/08/13 04:50, Harry Putnam wrote: [...] So, anyway, thinking I'll go with USE=-blksha1 -gpg -iconv -pcre -threads -webdav -cgi -cvs -doc -emacs -gnome-keyring -gtk -highlight -nls -ppcsha1 -subversion -test -tk -xinetd emerge -v dev-vcs/git Unless I hear something that would indicate it will be too crippled even for the usage I plan. You should of course put those USE flags in /etc/portage/package.use instead of setting them in the command-line, otherwise they won't be remembered. But I would go with the defaults anyway. There is no reason at all why you should not install 194 packages.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On 08/02/2013 09:38 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com writes: On 08/02/2013 08:22 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Now, is it reasonable to install that way? Will I run into some horrible unsightly mess using git, when installed this way. Without USE=perl, you'll get a surprise if you try to `git add -i`. Well, I do have perl installed so if its just a matter of having perl available then wouldn't it still work? USE=perl pulls in some perl packages that (ostensibly) `git add -i` uses to do its thing. It's possible that /if/ you happened to have those packages installed anyway, `git add -i` would pick them up at runtime and work. But if you have them installed anyway, why worry about the USE flag?
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com writes: [...] Unless I hear something that would indicate it will be too crippled even for the usage I plan. You should of course put those USE flags in /etc/portage/package.use instead of setting them in the command-line, otherwise they won't be remembered. But I would go with the defaults anyway. There is no reason at all why you should not install 194 packages. Only that this is a smallish install with only 32gb of disk space.
[gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On 03/08/13 06:20, Harry Putnam wrote: Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com writes: [...] Unless I hear something that would indicate it will be too crippled even for the usage I plan. You should of course put those USE flags in /etc/portage/package.use instead of setting them in the command-line, otherwise they won't be remembered. But I would go with the defaults anyway. There is no reason at all why you should not install 194 packages. Only that this is a smallish install with only 32gb of disk space. You would be surprised how little space most packages actually consume once installed :-) For example, my desktop has a full KDE install (*with* semantic-desktop), lots of extra packages for developing, graphics editing, audio editing, four different browsers with all their deps, etc. It's a multilib system with lots of 32-bit compatibility deps. In total, that's 1381 installed packages. Total space consumed is 8GB. So I'd say try to install it. If it turns out it takes too much space, it's very easy to get rid of all those deps again: emerge -aC dev-vcs/git emerge -a --depclean
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com wrote: On 03/08/13 06:20, Harry Putnam wrote: Nikos Chantziaras rea...@gmail.com writes: [...] Unless I hear something that would indicate it will be too crippled even for the usage I plan. You should of course put those USE flags in /etc/portage/package.use instead of setting them in the command-line, otherwise they won't be remembered. But I would go with the defaults anyway. There is no reason at all why you should not install 194 packages. Only that this is a smallish install with only 32gb of disk space. You would be surprised how little space most packages actually consume once installed :-) For example, my desktop has a full KDE install (*with* semantic-desktop), lots of extra packages for developing, graphics editing, audio editing, four different browsers with all their deps, etc. It's a multilib system with lots of 32-bit compatibility deps. In total, that's 1381 installed packages. Total space consumed is 8GB. So I'd say try to install it. If it turns out it takes too much space, it's very easy to get rid of all those deps again: Full GNOME+systemd desktop, plus goodies like LibreOffice and Chromium: acero ~ # du -sh /usr/bin/ 389M /usr/bin/ acero ~ # du -sh /bin/ 8.7M /bin/ acero ~ # du -sh /usr/sbin/ 32M /usr/sbin/ acero ~ # du -sh /sbin/ 6.2M /sbin/ acero ~ # du -sh /usr/lib64/ 2.2G /usr/lib64/ acero ~ # du -sh /lib64/ 45M /lib64/ 2.6 GB in total. Also: acero ~ # du -sh /usr/share/doc 2.5G /usr/share/doc You will save much more space by using USE=-doc (or perhaps even adding /usr/share/doc to INSTALL_MASK), than by removing potentially useful functionality. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do I really need 194 pkgs to install git?
On Sat, 3 Aug 2013 14:18:28 -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: acero ~ # du -sh /usr/share/doc 2.5G /usr/share/doc You will save much more space by using USE=-doc (or perhaps even adding /usr/share/doc to INSTALL_MASK), than by removing potentially useful functionality. USE=-doc will greatly reduce that without using INSTALL_MASK or omitting anything important. USE=doc should only control additional docs, such as needed by devs, although some packages don't respect this. -- Neil Bothwick Math and alcohol don't mix. Don't drink and derive. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] How much effort from udev-197-r3 to 206
I see an update to udev come up when investigating installing various other pkgs. eix shows I'm on 197-r3 and the most recent is 206. Will that be a hefty amount of change... and concomittant amount of work? Or something a lazy slug can manage?
[gentoo-user] Re: usb printer disappears on cups upgrade
On 08/02/2013 07:23 PM, William Kenworthy wrote: I have a long running machine with a local epson usb printer using the kernel lpusb Using cups =1.5.2-r4 I can print ... upgrade to 1.6.2-r* and cups cant see the usb printer. The only errors in the cups log are to do with systemd service files which I masked a couple of days ago - the usb problem was happening before though. I tried both with and without the kernel module and usb use flag with no difference. I cant create a new printer in 1.6.2 because the usb port doesnt show up at all. Does the printer appear in dmesg when you plug it in?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: usb printer disappears on cups upgrade
On 04/08/13 09:42, walt wrote: On 08/02/2013 07:23 PM, William Kenworthy wrote: I have a long running machine with a local epson usb printer using the kernel lpusb Using cups =1.5.2-r4 I can print ... upgrade to 1.6.2-r* and cups cant see the usb printer. The only errors in the cups log are to do with systemd service files which I masked a couple of days ago - the usb problem was happening before though. I tried both with and without the kernel module and usb use flag with no difference. I cant create a new printer in 1.6.2 because the usb port doesnt show up at all. Does the printer appear in dmesg when you plug it in? yes, it also shows in lsusb, and works if I roll back to the older version ... dont even have to reboot. I am thinking its a configuration issue but whatever it is is not obvious :( moriah ~ # dmesg|grep -i epson [3.276904] usb 2-1: Manufacturer: EPSON [4.296921] scsi 4:0:0:0: Direct-Access EPSONStylus Storage 1.00 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2 [ 16.953592] usb 5-3: Manufacturer: EPSON [ 17.967490] scsi 5:0:0:0: Direct-Access EPSONStylus Storage 1.00 PQ: 0 ANSI: 2 moriah ~ # moriah ~ # lsusb Bus 001 Device 003: ID 050d:0081 Belkin Components F8T001v2 Bluetooth Bus 002 Device 005: ID 045e:001c Microsoft Corp. Internet Keyboard Pro Bus 004 Device 003: ID 0403:6001 Future Technology Devices International, Ltd FT232 USB-Serial (UART) IC Bus 005 Device 003: ID 04b8:082e Seiko Epson Corp. PX-A720 [Stylus CX5900/CX6000/DX6000] Bus 001 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 002 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 003 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 004 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0001 Linux Foundation 1.1 root hub Bus 005 Device 001: ID 1d6b:0002 Linux Foundation 2.0 root hub Bus 002 Device 006: ID 046d:c501 Logitech, Inc. Cordless Mouse Receiver moriah I cant confirm (I have rolled back as I need to print today) but believe the scanner (xsane) in this printer still works fine with either version of cups (its basicly independent)
Re: [gentoo-user] Moving from old udev to eudev
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 02:42:36AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote nope, you just believed all the FUD there has been out there. i've said it many times, and i'll say it again: the only real different is USE=rule-generator and that's it and sys-fs/eudev is constantly out of date and haven't developed any features of their own udev, the red-headed stepchild of systemd, hasn't exactly had a lot of new features, either. The following FUD brought to you by Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html Well, we intent to continue to make it possible to run udevd outside of systemd. But that's about it. We will not polish that, or add new features to that or anything. OTOH we do polish behaviour of udev when used *within* systemd however, and that's our primary focus. And what we will certainly not do is compromise the uniform integration into systemd for some cosmetic improvements for non-systemd systems. Straight from the horse's mouth, udev won't be getting new features and the systemd maintainers' main target is integration into systemd. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Moving from old udev to eudev
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 05:02:39AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote Looking forward to lastrite sys-fs/eudev just like sys-apps/module-init-tools already was removed as unnecessary later on. You want eudev removed, and Lennart Poettering wants udev on non-systemd systems dropped. Add those two items together, and we get systemd rammed down our throats... http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html (Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely.) -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-user] Moving from old udev to eudev
On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 10:03:58AM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote FUD again. The backwards compability is still all there and udev can be built standalone and ran standalone. For how long can it be built standalone? The following FUD brought to you courtesy of Kay Sievers... http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-July/006065.html We promised to keep udev properly *running* as standalone, we never told that it can be *build* standalone. And that still stands. We never claimed, that all the surrounding things like documentation always fully match, if only udev is picked out of systemd. I would welcome if people stop reading that promise into the announcement, it just wasn't written there. That's not some paranoid conspiracy theorist, that's the systemd developer speaking. And on the contrary, there was no need for sys-fs/eudev to remove support for sys-fs/systemd when it could have supported both sys-apps/systemd and sys-apps/openrc like sys-fs/udev does without issues. What do you mean by eudev supporting systemd? udev is an integrated part of the systemd tarball (that can operate standalone... for now). eudev isn't. I'm old enough to remember IBM's OS/2 attempting to support Windows 3.1 and how that got broken by minor binary changes in Windows 3.11. eudev would be in a similar situation, attempting to support a hostile systemd side-stream. I think that the best way to end these arguments is a peaceful divorce with systemd and eudev each going their own way. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
[gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo is so AWESOME
Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: Steven J. Long wrote: Again you're wilfully misinterpreting what I've said, and answering a completely different point. You didn't know the basics of how to go about approaching Gentoo. While I (and others BTW) My point is simply this: there is a world of difference between someone who simply sends two emails to the wrong place, a busy list that often has a lot of controversy on it, and someone who actively helps out other users, files bugs, patches and new or updated ebuilds and knows enough to be of use in #gentoo-dev-help. FTR, I do not count myself amongst that latter group. I just know them when I see them; but they're always known to gentoo folks already. was trying to provide an external POV with points to make outside contributions and rectruitement more efficient, You've sold your tirades under that banner, yes. I'm not buying; as is prob'y clear. you guys @gentoo.org turned this thread into plain bullshits. As has been pointed out, I am not @gentoo.org. Sorry for use of 'we' in that context: I was perhaps reacting emotionally as well. Frankly I'd taken care to spell out exactly what I was saying, and you just ignored the content, and reacted to the perceived insult. Starting with a statement like Please note I'm not discussing any technical ability you may or may not have. does not allow you to make the exact opposite Again: I was not discussing technical ability. Knowing the basics of how Gentoo operates is not a technical challenge. So you're wrong: I never disparaged your technical ability as a developer. Perhaps you should just take what people type at face value: it saves a lot of confusion. Especially given the differences in language that occur; that was why I spelt it out. and being insulting or border-line in the rest of your mails. I was being sarcastic in my last mail. Prior to that I was truly simply trying to explain, where you'd gone wrong. Further, I spoke informally (wtf did you expect?) since I assumed you were comfortable with the informality that is pretty much par for the course on most mailing-list and web-forums. And I stand by that: if you don't do the groundwork, I have zero sympathy for you. Of much more concern, and where the cultural shift needs to take place, are the people who do the groundwork, and are proven useful to the community and the project, but never acknowledged. Many of them have a decade or two of experience at least in Computing, and they'd be valuable and productive members of the dev-team, as well as bringing some longer-term perspective. But I actually think this whole thread is a change in that direction: developers are reaching out and asking for people to get involved, and engaging with those who have already been doing that, as well as providing the basic info to those who haven't. So in terms of Gentoo and the project we care about, things are getting better. IMO. BTW everything I say is my opinion. I don't usually bother to qualify it, as it's obvious imo. I don't remember I ever faced to such direct and personal judgments in the open source world. Blimey, you have led a sheltered life. You'll grow a thicker-skin: you'd better if you intend to do much in FLOSS. But feel free to hate me: you won't be alone, and I have grown a thicker skin over the last few years, so I'll cope. Oh, I know you pretend it's not. No, I just think you take yourself too seriously. And you still haven't really sat down and considered the points I made in my first mail, which you prefer to have restated in order to ignore again, afaic. So, I'm on my way, dear, in order to: - learn how to approach a community (stuff that practically every user knows); And yet you didn't, nor did you bother to do much looking around on the websites. More importantly, if you are intending to collaborate with a wider community, that believe me can be an awful lot nastier than me, you *really* cannot handle that being pointed out. You might want to work on that. - learn where to find the doc and read it; - learn all the basics; Hallelujah. I look forward to your contributions on bugzilla, the forums, IRC and sunrise. - not magnify myself. Thank you for all the smart feedbacks. Obvisously, it was all about me. You did make it all about you, yeah. And then took everything personally as an attack on you, when two minutes' reflection (or a re-read) would have shown you that the basics were nothing at all to do with coding, and everything to do with Gentoo processes. F**k I want to believe you don't embody the dominant POV of the Gentoo maintainers about the original topic. / I don't embody any official position on anything. However, from my experience, I think most people would expect you, or anyone else, to have at least done some basic research about the organisation they claim to want to join. I'm going serioulsy tired of this thread. Me too. Repeating myself for the
