Re: [gentoo-user] rubygems-1.9.1 error
On Monday 24 Mar 2014 23:23:08 Tom Wijsman wrote: On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 22:44:23 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday 24 Mar 2014 21:28:56 Tom Wijsman wrote: On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:23:55 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: /usr/lib64/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems.rb:30:in `require': cannot load such file -- rubygems/defaults (LoadError) The missing file is there, I think: # ls -la /usr/lib64/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems.rb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 34951 Apr 20 2012 /usr/lib64/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems.rb What now? It can't load what is on line 30 of that file; there'll be a require instruction, and that require instruction would bring in another file. Aha! That's what it meant. :-) The line in question is: require 'rubygems/defaults' Where should I look for that? Not that I know Ruby programming; but I assume that either looks for a defaults file in a rubygems directory, or it looks for a defaults module inside a rubygems file. You might want to file a bug at https://bugs.gentoo.org for the Ruby maintainers to fix this dependency. Problem solved. I had to remerge rubygems. When I used --depclean only rubygems1 was removed. It seems it needed to have rebygems 4 and 6 rebuilt. I haven't had this problem on two other boxen, so I am hesitant to report a bug. Probably I did something wrong. Thank you Tom! :-) -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-user] Re: rubygems-1.9.1 error
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:23:55 +, Mick wrote: I have been chasing my tail with ruby tonight. The masking of ruby18 meant that I had to unmerge a lot of ruby packages and then portage chose what to merge afresh. unmerge or depclean? unmerge is less safe and may leave your system in a bad state. emerge -N is a better way to handle this situation. /usr/lib64/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems.rb:30:in `require': cannot load such file -- rubygems/defaults (LoadError) This file is part of rubygems, which in turn is a dependency of ruby itself. emerge rubygems manually first. Kind regards, Hans
[gentoo-user] Re: HP scanner is no longer found
Dale rdalek1967 at gmail.com writes: This is confusing. Thanks. I'll post when I get to test some more. Sure, I'll be curious how/what the resolution is to the usb disappearing. Do check your usb rules (udev? systemd ? ) or where ever they are defined; for how it is defined on the usb buss often changes (generic antedote,I know but the usb buss can be instantiated in several different ways (on linux) and I'm not sure on the latest (moving) semantics). On a side note, I'm buying a John Deere 4000 (low hours, well maintained), from my brother in law, so any private emails on advice are most welcome. I'm going to use it to push dirt around for a house flipper team effort; and when I get angry at 'puters... ;-) James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: rubygems-1.9.1 error
On Tuesday 25 Mar 2014 06:31:51 Hans de Graaff wrote: On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:23:55 +, Mick wrote: I have been chasing my tail with ruby tonight. The masking of ruby18 meant that I had to unmerge a lot of ruby packages and then portage chose what to merge afresh. unmerge or depclean? unmerge is less safe and may leave your system in a bad state. emerge -N is a better way to handle this situation. /usr/lib64/ruby/1.9.1/rubygems.rb:30:in `require': cannot load such file -- rubygems/defaults (LoadError) This file is part of rubygems, which in turn is a dependency of ruby itself. emerge rubygems manually first. Thanks Hans, I did just that and the problem was solved. Also thank you for your help on IRC yesterday. :-) -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 21/03/14, Tom Wijsman wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:10:49 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: So let's get this straight. You want most everyone on this list to change what they have to do to remove dups caused by you, instead of you changing what you do to fix the problem? Everyone else is okay with it, as only one in a thousand speaks up about it; the problem rather is with that 0.1% than that it is with me, as I just use mailing lists as they are supposed to be used. Yes. I want to be cc'ed on threads I'm involved in. That's just how it should be done and what almost everybody expects on technical mailing lists. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
The 21/03/14, Dale wrote: Tom Wijsman wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:41:03 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: FYI. Most people don't say anything, they just blacklist you. After that, you don't exist to them. Yes, that's up to those few; it could happen, but most respond instead. I just read the last message from you Tom. Good bye. Heh. Blacklisting just make things even worse because you won't blacklist other contributors responding to Tom. So, you'll have broken and partial threads. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Tue, March 25, 2014 16:35, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: The 21/03/14, Tom Wijsman wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 07:10:49 -0500 Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: So let's get this straight. You want most everyone on this list to change what they have to do to remove dups caused by you, instead of you changing what you do to fix the problem? Everyone else is okay with it, as only one in a thousand speaks up about it; the problem rather is with that 0.1% than that it is with me, as I just use mailing lists as they are supposed to be used. Yes. I want to be cc'ed on threads I'm involved in. That's just how it should be done and what almost everybody expects on technical mailing lists. Nicolas, It has already been determined that on this list we do not want extra CCs, Please respect that and don't reopen this discussion. -- Joost
[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] LENOVO Z510 + Dual Boot + Gentoo == True ?
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 20:56:26 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday 15 Mar 2014 17:17:19 »Q« wrote: On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:33:20 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday 08 Mar 2014 20:22:12 »Q« wrote: On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 08:23:21 +0100 grub booted Gentoo just fine, but Windows booting failed, something about not finding partitions or files. Instead of troubleshooting that, I disabled os probing for grub (GRUB_DISABLE_OS_PROBER=true in /etc/default/grub) and added Windows via /etc/grub.d/40_custom , like so: If you moved the MSWindows OS or boot partitions then the UUIDs would have changed. I moved the OS partition, and it's UUID did indeed change. You'll need to edit the MSWindows boot menu (in the MSWindows boot partition) and change their entrie(s) accordingly. If somebody can post a link to a recipe for doing that, I'd appreciate it. I don't understand the Windows boot stuff. Like most things MSWindows related you will need patience which in my case runs short - at some subconscious level I consider spending time on MSWindows a resentful waste of my life ... but YMMV. I've snipped it, but thanks very much for all the good info in your post. Before your post, I'd gotten bogged down in bcdedit.exe documentation, and that resentful attitude had overwhelmed me. You post makes a lot of it clearer to me than Microsoft's documentation did. I'll file it away for a rainy day when I tolerate wasting some of my life on it.
[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] LENOVO Z510 + Dual Boot + Gentoo == True ?
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:07:49 +0200 Matti Nykyri matti.nyk...@iki.fi wrote: On Mar 15, 2014, at 19:17, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: On Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:33:20 + Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote: On Saturday 08 Mar 2014 20:22:12 »Q« wrote: On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 08:23:21 +0100 grub booted Gentoo just fine, but Windows booting failed, something about not finding partitions or files. Instead of troubleshooting that, I disabled os probing for grub (GRUB_DISABLE_OS_PROBER=true in /etc/default/grub) and added Windows via /etc/grub.d/40_custom , like so: If you moved the MSWindows OS or boot partitions then the UUIDs would have changed. I moved the OS partition, and it's UUID did indeed change. I have swaped the hard drive from my dual boot box and ran into the same problem trying get windows 7 to boot. As you also quite fast realice by reading different forums that changing windows boot parameters is a quite big hassle. I would not go that way! You have another simpler solution. Change the hard disk device ID to the same value as the old disk. It is written on MBR. Change the UUID of the windows partition to the same as on the old partition. UUID on NTFS partition is written at the beginning of the partition at 0x48-4F. So by changing 2x16 bytes of data your machine should boot again correctly. Also if you grub is not on the same physical disk as windows then you need trick windows by changing the order with grub before booting (see map command) Thanks. That is a lot simpler, but I'm too scared I'd screw it up.
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all.
[gentoo-user] grub2 defaults
Howdy, So I have these entries in my /etc/default/grub file: GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR=Gentoo GRUB_DEFAULT=kernel-3.13.6-gentoo GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=3 GRUB_TIMEOUT=10 GRUB_GFXMODE=1024x768 I ran 'grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg' after the last ebuild of 3.13.6-gentoo /boot shows: kernel-3.13.0-gentoo kernel-3.13.0-gentoo-r1 kernel-3.13.1-gentoo kernel-3.13.6-gentoo kernel-3.13.6B-gentoo kernel-3.13.7-gentoo Obviously, I like to kept kernel experiments around a while So when I get the Grub2 (ascii) boot menu and just select the default, it boots kernel-3.13.7-gentoo, despite 'kernel-3.13.6-gentoo' being set in as the default for Grub2? Comment thoughts and suggestions, including deeper reading on grub2 is most welcome, particulary Grub2 examples. Also, is there a nice 'gui' boot-menu for grub2 ? It seems to take several repeated attemps for grub2 to correctly use the kernel I desire, despite what syntax/order I use. If I boot a kernel that is not the default, it takes about 2 minutes, then another 2 minutes of blank screen then it boot fairly quickly. The mobo is a GA-99FXA-UD3 and this might not have the bios/uefi/??? optimally configured? (first gigabyte moble). The is what I have read on grub2 (man pages, gentoo wiki) so additional reading, with some useful examples would also be much appreciated.
Re: [gentoo-user] using git to track (gentoo) server configs ?
On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:01:47 +0100 Stefan G. Weichinger li...@xunil.at wrote: I happily use git for local repositories to track configs in /etc or for example, /root/bin or /usr/local/bin (scripts ..) There is also etckeeper, yes, useful as well. But I would like to have some kind of meta-repo for all the gentoo-servers I am responsible for ... some remote repo to pull from. Most files in /etc might be rather identical so it would make sense to only track the individual changes (saves space and bandwidth) Maybe it would be possible to use git-branches for each server? Does anyone of you already use something like that? What would be a proper and clever way to do that? Yes, I know, there is puppet and stuff ... but as far as I see this is overkill for my needs. I'd like to maintain some good and basic /etc, maybe plus /var/lib/portage/world and /root/.alias (etc etc ..) to be able to deploy a good and nice standardized gentoo server. Then adjust config at the customer (network, fstab, ...) and commit this to a central repo (on my main server at my office or so). Yes, rsyncing that stuff also works in a way ... but ... versioning is better. How do you guys manage this? Looking forward to your good ideas ;-) Regards, Stefan You are probably looking for cfengine or puppet --- Jan Matějka| Gentoo Developer https://gentoo.org | Gentoo Linux GPG: A33E F5BC A9F6 DAFD 2021 6FB6 3EBF D45B EEB6 CA8B signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] DRM kernel issues
OK, So I built this kernel twice, one with DRM * and once DRM [m] In the /boot dir ; diff config-3.13.6-gentoo config-3.13.6B-gentoo yeilds: 2256,2257c2256,2257 CONFIG_AGP=y CONFIG_AGP_AMD64=y --- CONFIG_AGP=m CONFIG_AGP_AMD64=m 2264,2265c2264,2265 CONFIG_DRM=y CONFIG_DRM_KMS_HELPER=y --- CONFIG_DRM=m CONFIG_DRM_KMS_HELPER=m 2268c2268 CONFIG_DRM_TTM=y --- CONFIG_DRM_TTM=m 2278c2278 CONFIG_DRM_RADEON=y --- CONFIG_DRM_RADEON=m So when I boot the one with DRM_Radeon=m, I still get this error message building the latest radeon driver: * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options... (red) * CONFIG_DRM must be disabled or compiled as a module and not (red) * loaded for direct rendering to work. * Please check to make sure these options are set correctly. Sure it can easily be related to my limited knowledge of grub2, but I did boot the 3.13.6B version of the kernel where all is set as modules ideas or suggestions as to what I missed? James
Re: [gentoo-user] grub2 defaults
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:42:07 + (UTC), James wrote: So I have these entries in my /etc/default/grub file: GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR=Gentoo GRUB_DEFAULT=kernel-3.13.6-gentoo GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=3 GRUB_TIMEOUT=10 GRUB_GFXMODE=1024x768 I ran 'grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg' after the last ebuild of 3.13.6-gentoo /boot shows: kernel-3.13.0-gentoo kernel-3.13.0-gentoo-r1 kernel-3.13.1-gentoo kernel-3.13.6-gentoo kernel-3.13.6B-gentoo kernel-3.13.7-gentoo Obviously, I like to kept kernel experiments around a while So when I get the Grub2 (ascii) boot menu and just select the default, it boots kernel-3.13.7-gentoo, despite 'kernel-3.13.6-gentoo' being set in as the default for Grub2? DEFAULT, if not set to a number, matches the title or --id of a menu entry, not the kernel name (you could have several entries with the same kernel). Also, is there a nice 'gui' boot-menu for grub2 ? Yes, GRUB2 can use themes. The starfield theme is included, uncomment the GRUB_THEME setting in the defaults file. The is what I have read on grub2 (man pages, gentoo wiki) so additional reading, with some useful examples would also be much appreciated. The grub info pages are more helpful than the man page. -- Neil Bothwick Always be sincere even if you don't mean it. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] DRM kernel issues
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:48:29 + (UTC), James wrote: So I built this kernel twice, one with DRM * and once DRM [m] So when I boot the one with DRM_Radeon=m, I still get this error message building the latest radeon driver: * Checking for suitable kernel configuration options... (red) * CONFIG_DRM must be disabled or compiled as a module and not (red) * loaded for direct rendering to work. * Please check to make sure these options are set correctly. Doesn't the ebuild check the config in /usr/src/linux, not /proc/config.gz? So it is checking your latest config, not the running kernel. -- Neil Bothwick Hospitality: making your guests feel like they're at home, even if you wish they were. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] DRM kernel issues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 26/03/14 07:48, James wrote: So I built this kernel twice, one with DRM * and once DRM [m] Sure it can easily be related to my limited knowledge of grub2, but I did boot the 3.13.6B version of the kernel where all is set as modules The build process builds against whatever was last built in /usr/src/linux. That means that, even though you've booted a kernel that has DRM built as a module, when ati-drivers builds, it is looking at the config and objects that reside within /usr/src/linux. That being said, I'm pretty sure the warning you're being presented with is just a warning and is safe to ignore, given that you know you need to be running a kernel that does not have DRM built-in. Cheers; wraeth -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlMx/6sACgkQGYlqHeQRhkyEzwD/R+WuCQZvxD4pqS/3gxtfNcdn J1+91UsQKlcKf9+ZXl8A/1XAjptt2Bd9lfWh3TrVsE7M3kWguFnT4lSoUztm0bOS =nESM -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 25/03/2014 22:08, »Q« wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. You are conflating two things, it's actually quite disingenuous. Gentoo provides choice so you can do what you want. That doesn't preclude providing a default that suits people who see no need to make *that* choice for *them*, particularly when the thing being chosen is necessary or almost so. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all. You have to have *something* to be pid 1. the stage 3 might as well provide one of those somethings that suits the common case You can make it /bin/bash if you want, but that would be a very niche usage. The large majority of new installs will want a conventional init system whether SysVinit-based or systemd based. Traditionally SysVinit was the only real contender and baselayout/openerc were originally written for Gentoo. So those are still the defaults. Without a default, the user must set one up manually for things to work at all on first reboot. The install docs try hard to get the user through the necessary steps to get a bootable system, a lot of effort went into making the steps to accomplish that fewer, no more -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
[gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:25:26 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/03/2014 22:08, »Q« wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. You are conflating two things, it's actually quite disingenuous. Gentoo provides choice so you can do what you want. That doesn't preclude providing a default that suits people who see no need to make *that* choice for *them*, particularly when the thing being chosen is necessary or almost so. Of course it doesn't preclude that; I'm sorry if implied that it did. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all. You have to have *something* to be pid 1. the stage 3 might as well provide one of those somethings that suits the common case You can make it /bin/bash if you want, but that would be a very niche usage. The large majority of new installs will want a conventional init system whether SysVinit-based or systemd based. Traditionally SysVinit was the only real contender and baselayout/openerc were originally written for Gentoo. So those are still the defaults. Without a default, the user must set one up manually for things to work at all on first reboot. The install docs try hard to get the user through the necessary steps to get a bootable system, a lot of effort went into making the steps to accomplish that fewer, no more Requiring the fewest possible number of choices to get to a bootable system is a much better argument for a default than defaults are always good.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie
On 26/03/2014 01:34, »Q« wrote: On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:25:26 +0200 Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On 25/03/2014 22:08, »Q« wrote: On Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:37:20 -0400 Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 3/20/2014 5:48 PM, »Q« boxc...@gmx.net wrote: Why should Gentoo have a default? Defaults are always a good idea - as long as they are reasonable and rational. In that case, Gentoo is missing a lot of good things, from a default system logger to a default desktop environment. AFAICS, the benefit of defaults, provided they're reasonable, is that they remove the burden of making choices from the user. But I keep reading that Gentoo is all about user choice. You are conflating two things, it's actually quite disingenuous. Gentoo provides choice so you can do what you want. That doesn't preclude providing a default that suits people who see no need to make *that* choice for *them*, particularly when the thing being chosen is necessary or almost so. Of course it doesn't preclude that; I'm sorry if implied that it did. ISTM the only good reason is that not having a default would make the documentation a lot more complicated. Documentation, *and* the install process itself. I'm not seeing that at all. You have to have *something* to be pid 1. the stage 3 might as well provide one of those somethings that suits the common case You can make it /bin/bash if you want, but that would be a very niche usage. The large majority of new installs will want a conventional init system whether SysVinit-based or systemd based. Traditionally SysVinit was the only real contender and baselayout/openerc were originally written for Gentoo. So those are still the defaults. Without a default, the user must set one up manually for things to work at all on first reboot. The install docs try hard to get the user through the necessary steps to get a bootable system, a lot of effort went into making the steps to accomplish that fewer, no more Requiring the fewest possible number of choices to get to a bootable system is a much better argument for a default than defaults are always good. Yes, defaults make the most sense when you have virtuals, or when you must have 1 thing out of a range of things. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
