Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
I would go with either /lib/modules/extramodules/kernel/ or /lib/modules/kernel/extramodules/ But maybe this is just semantics and I'm just picky about directory structure. On Dec 29, 2011 2:40 AM, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote: I'm the maintainer of nvidia-beta-all - https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=31123 The nature of the package is that to provide the nvidia-beta driver for all currently installed kernels. I use some horrible tricks to accomplish that involving scanning the kernel images in /boot With the recent changes to include the 'extramodules' directory, I recently found time to modify a small portion of the PKGBUILD to place the nvidia.ko files in /lib/modules/extramodules-3.1.*/ directories instead of in /lib/modules/3.1.*/kernel/drivers/video. Saves me (and others) re-building of the package. I also have my own script which does the same module-building for virtualbox (for all kernels instead of only the running one) which I've been using since before virtualbox-source existed (with its own highly complete and complicated vboxbuild script). While looking at my script and comparing it with vboxbuild from virtualbox-source, I noticed that that script placed modules in /lib/modules/3.1.*-*-ARCH/extramodules rather than in /lib/modules/extramodules-3.1.*-*-ARCH Is this (the former) location recommended over what I'm currently doing (the latter)? If I'm not mistaken, placing the module in the former would result in 'left-behind' symlinks/directories in /lib/modules which placing the module in the latter would not? Thanks for the clarification (and for reading this).
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
Thanks for the response, but please don't top-post =) On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com wrote: I would go with either /lib/modules/extramodules/kernel/ or /lib/modules/kernel/extramodules/ But maybe this is just semantics and I'm just picky about directory structure. To make it clear, I'm not asking about changing where 'extramodules' goes, as that's up to the devs. I'm asking whether my package (and my own scripts) should be using the 'general' extramodules folder (which they would in the end no matter what). Your first suggestion doesn't make sense because that would defeat the purpose of having 'extramodules' in the first place (so minor kernel version updates do not need rebuilding of modules). The second one is currently symlinked to /lib/modules/extramodules-kernel
Re: [arch-general] Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of Pulseaudio?
On 12/28/2011 10:16 PM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Steve Holmessteve.holme...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 11:18:33AM +, Paul Gideon Dann wrote: Seriously? It's comments like this that make me wonder if subscribing to this list is really worth it. At least you did go on to provide some useful information, albeit in a if I MUST stoop down to your level kind of tone. My suggestion is: (a) stop whining; or (b) learn how to code and cut out all sound stuff out of gnome-settings-daemon. No matter what you choose, there is one more option, which is much better: GET OUTTA HERE and use Debian if you like it so much. Not right? Then buy a Mac. Or Windows if you want to. PERIOD. Wow. I'm truly mortified that the Linux world is associated with behaviour like yours. What gives you the right to talk like that to *anyone*, let alone someone who came to us for help? Paul +1 I've sure seen my share of rude and discurtius answers tonight. I understand if the discussion drags on and yes, Ralph was given some constructive answers about gnome and its dependencies. And yes, Ralph needs to except the reasoning about upstream designs outside of Arch's control. but still, the put-downs are quite unnecessary as far as I'm concerned. Both the initial mail and the put-downs, would you agree? The problem with these sort of 'questions' is how they keep cropping up. Not just talking about pulseaudio, but the whole 'Arch is supposed to be this because I believe it' stuff is tiresome. At least here you dont get the insane amount of spam like on debian boards and people here want to help even if in a rude tone. And most dont get offended here easily if someone miss speaks or does not fully grasp the English language. Debian boards are the reason I switched to Arch and while yes it a whole new world and way of thinking some just are slower to adopt that most of the issues can be solved on the wiki. Tiresome or not its the way of life on boards there is always good and bad. Though I still dont grasp if reading a message gets you so pissy you have to resort to high school antics you probably should not be responding to that message. If its a repeated question why not either no one respond which would force the person to research on their own or just send one message to check the wiki and or other pertinent place where the info has been said numerous times. I am on gumstix board as well and thats how they roll, stupid question or one thats commonly asked and answered tons of times just get ignored or someone takes 2 seconds to say hey read the wiki or search the archives of this board question has been answered. Just my .02 from a recent Arch convert.
Re: [arch-general] Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of Pulseaudio?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/29/2011 1:57 PM, Don Juan wrote: If its a repeated question why not either no one respond which would force the person to research on their own or just send one message to check the wiki and or other pertinent place where the info has been said numerous times. I am on gumstix board as well and thats how they roll, stupid question or one thats commonly asked and answered tons of times just get ignored or someone takes 2 seconds to say hey read the wiki or search the archives of this board question has been answered. Just my .02 from a recent Arch convert. I was wondering why the same thing didn't happen here. The last time I asked a silly question on a mailing list, I woke up the next morning to over 200 messages to me, not the mailing list, with various links to LMGTFY.com. The lesson was learned without too much embarrassment on my part and barely a blip of mailing list traffic. - --David Kolb -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJO/MAqAAoJEPmaoQuUPbmtcCQH/j+ubJrvBqlHhQ7TWxieKA0e +dgoKCmJmI2HmdmSZ24H/gGL/AxpUlXnv6FmocuquhP6jAsDrsu7X/d/+UfxEnpr Fqx8MDCFGAGzLJz4Vd4feny0EqqtbyVHqO8USfKTTLVU1uX7ysARtKMh/H+c1YrM bYzEoSnztUetjv1f9obXG/6rxgxx7FHWAz+yWbDphyuvjnYWmNvl2zYcnPqOn748 GGKR3zIGd1bx1pExrC9KzLtp194VfEIO/xOaEZGdWDrb/hiLVr/bd9bRwDxqjNfZ TU+Uw6SlGVwEs4JJtmdDJzefJW5ihVt4Am0FgfGoeUlLYUciUDkotCPT+y2AtuA= =iyvU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
Hmm I always reply in a top post way since I see it as a faster way to get the answer from the person without having to continuously scroll down. Also the quoted text (below the post) is history. It is only Hmm I always reply in a top post way since I see it as a faster way to get the answer from the person without having to continuously scroll down. Also the quoted text (below the post) is history. It is only there as reference of the conversation, while what is at the top is the current trend. I will bottom-post from now on since I'm assuming that's what the Arch community uses. as reference of the conversation, while what is at the top is the current trend. I will bottom-post from now on since I'm assuming that's what the Arch community uses. On Dec 29, 2011 3:56 AM, Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the response, but please don't top-post =) On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com wrote: I would go with either /lib/modules/extramodules/kernel/ or /lib/modules/kernel/extramodules/ But maybe this is just semantics and I'm just picky about directory structure. To make it clear, I'm not asking about changing where 'extramodules' goes, as that's up to the devs. I'm asking whether my package (and my own scripts) should be using the 'general' extramodules folder (which they would in the end no matter what). Your first suggestion doesn't make sense because that would defeat the purpose of having 'extramodules' in the first place (so minor kernel version updates do not need rebuilding of modules). The second one is currently symlinked to /lib/modules/extramodules-kernel I referred to the first location since I was looking at it more from a dedicated folder view, where each subject gets its own folder. Maybe you could lower the location by one and noe touch it if its a minor revision. /lib/modules/kernel/ /lib/extramodules/kernel/ There may also be a symlink from the extramodule dir to the corresponding kernel in the modules dir to connect them together.
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
Am Thu, 29 Dec 2011 15:12:53 -0500 schrieb Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com: Hmm I always reply in a top post way since I see it as a faster way to get the answer from the person without having to continuously scroll down. Also the quoted text (below the post) is history. It is only Hmm I always reply in a top post way since I see it as a faster way to get the answer from the person without having to continuously scroll down. Also the quoted text (below the post) is history. Full quotes are as bad as top posts. An e-mail doesn't need to and shouldn't contain the full correspondence history. It just shall contain the quotes to which the answer refers. http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote This way it's not necesary to always scroll down pages. Heiko
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
You are correct. I just let my email application automatically handle the quoting. On Dec 29, 2011 3:47 PM, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote: Am Thu, 29 Dec 2011 15:12:53 -0500 schrieb Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com: Hmm I always reply in a top post way since I see it as a faster way to get the answer from the person without having to continuously scroll down. Also the quoted text (below the post) is history. It is only Hmm I always reply in a top post way since I see it as a faster way to get the answer from the person without having to continuously scroll down. Also the quoted text (below the post) is history. Full quotes are as bad as top posts. An e-mail doesn't need to and shouldn't contain the full correspondence history. It just shall contain the quotes to which the answer refers. http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote This way it's not necesary to always scroll down pages. Heiko
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
Am Thu, 29 Dec 2011 15:56:21 -0500 schrieb Jonathan Vasquez jvasquez1...@gmail.com: You are correct. I just let my email application automatically handle the quoting. E-mail applications, particularly Google Mail, don't always follow the common standards. So if Google Mail doesn't respect the Netiquette and the common internet standards, you should interfere and refinish what it does automatically or use an e-mail application which do respect the standards. It's pretty easy. Automation is not always the best way of handling things, not even in the IT. And Google is not always the best company, not even their search engine. Heiko
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 14:01, Heiko Baums li...@baums-on-web.de wrote: E-mail applications, particularly Google Mail, don't always follow the common standards. So if Google Mail doesn't respect the Netiquette and the common internet standards, you should interfere and refinish what it does automatically or use an e-mail application which do respect the standards. It's pretty easy. I don't see that Gmail does anything wrong. It starts you off at the top of the email, yes — this lets you select what quoted material you wish to keep, because Gmail can't possibly know what you want to respond to. Perhaps Gmail could start you off at the bottom of the email, or not quote anything by default and just present you with a blank slate, but either of these ends up requiring more effort than the default behaviour. This is a purely a matter of netiquette, and can't be blamed on the application. ~Celti
Re: [arch-general] Is there a clean solution to get completely rid of Pulseaudio?
On Dec 30, 2011 3:32 AM, David Kolb david.k...@krinchan.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/29/2011 1:57 PM, Don Juan wrote: If its a repeated question why not either no one respond which would force the person to research on their own or just send one message to check the wiki and or other pertinent place where the info has been said numerous times. I am on gumstix board as well and thats how they roll, stupid question or one thats commonly asked and answered tons of times just get ignored or someone takes 2 seconds to say hey read the wiki or search the archives of this board question has been answered. Just my .02 from a recent Arch convert. I was wondering why the same thing didn't happen here. The last time I asked a silly question on a mailing list, I woke up the next morning to over 200 messages to me, not the mailing list, with various links to LMGTFY.com. The lesson was learned without too much embarrassment on my part and barely a blip of mailing list traffic. It's because the word pulseaudio generates emotional reactions =)
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
On Dec 30, 2011 5:14 AM, Patrick Burroughs celticmad...@gmail.com wrote: This is a purely a matter of netiquette, and can't be blamed on the application. ~Celti While top-posting discussions are interesting and all, I'd really prefer an answer to my initial query on extramodules
Re: [arch-general] Using the new 'extramodules' directory in linux-* packages
Am Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:55:19 +0800 schrieb Oon-Ee Ng ngoonee.t...@gmail.com: While top-posting discussions are interesting and all, I'd really prefer an answer to my initial query on extramodules /lib/modules/3.1.*-*-ARCH/extramodules rather than in /lib/modules/extramodules-3.1.*-*-ARCH I would prefer the second one, because the first one is a symlink to the second one. So I guess the official path is the second one. And the second patch isn't changed with every minor kernel update. Heiko
[arch-general] local repository
I would like to setup a local repository for my trinity packages I have a server with apache installed and a virtual host is configured. I copied all the files to the server and did a repo-add trinity.db.gz *.pkg.* I put this into the server pacman.conf [trinity] Server = file:///srv/http/trinity/i686 Which works as expected. I then put this in pacman.conf on the client [trinity] Server = http:///trinity.bildanet.com/i686 when I do a pacman -Syy I get the following :: Synchronizing package databases... trinity 3.6K 1380.8K/s 00:00:00 [###] 100% error: failed retrieving file 'trinity.db' from : Unknown resolver error error: failed to update trinity (Unknown resolver error) ping shows that trinity.bildanet.com is resolvable for the client. This is browseable from a web browser on the client and shows all the packages as well as the trinity.db and trinity.db.tar.gz file. Is there something else I need to do to get this working or what am I missing?
Re: [arch-general] local repository
On Thursday 29 December 2011 08:45:11 pm Karol Blazewicz wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:33 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote: http:///trinity.bildanet.com/i686 Have you tried with 2 '/' (slashes) after 'http:' instead of 3? No I have not. I tried that and it now works Thank you
Re: [arch-general] local repository
On 29 December 2011 20:55, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote: On Thursday 29 December 2011 08:45:11 pm Karol Blazewicz wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:33 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote: http:///trinity.bildanet.com/i686 Have you tried with 2 '/' (slashes) after 'http:' instead of 3? No I have not. I tried that and it now works Thank you you should make those public :-)
Re: [arch-general] local repository
lmfao calvin On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.comwrote: On 29 December 2011 20:55, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote: On Thursday 29 December 2011 08:45:11 pm Karol Blazewicz wrote: On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 2:33 AM, Baho Utot baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote: http:///trinity.bildanet.com/i686 Have you tried with 2 '/' (slashes) after 'http:' instead of 3? No I have not. I tried that and it now works Thank you you should make those public :-) -- Jonathan Vasquez
