Re: Why compiling.
On Ma, 31 iul 12, 13:21:40, Celejar wrote: From where? Your network is down and your other machine runs on a custom kernel. Plug the regular machine straight into the internet connection (cable modem) and grab an appropriate kernel. Devil's advocate mode: sorry, your ISP requires PPPoE, but you don't have ppp and whatever else needed installed :p Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 1 Aug 2012 19:32:15 +0300 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: On Ma, 31 iul 12, 13:21:40, Celejar wrote: From where? Your network is down and your other machine runs on a custom kernel. Plug the regular machine straight into the internet connection (cable modem) and grab an appropriate kernel. Devil's advocate mode: sorry, your ISP requires PPPoE, but you don't have ppp and whatever else needed installed :p Fair enough ;) Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120801201140.6b6ac037.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:05:02 +0300 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 22:50:02, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:22:46 +0300 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite sure I get you - if my hypothetical router (running x86 HW, not like my actual routers that run OpenWRT on arm, and that don't have lots of extra MB to spare) needs a new kernel, I can just send over a distro stock one; From where? Your network is down and your other machine runs on a custom kernel. Plug the regular machine straight into the internet connection (cable modem) and grab an appropriate kernel. why should my work machine kernel need to be appropriate for my router? A stock kernel should work for both. IMHO, even if you do use custom kernels, it's probably a good idea to keep a stock kernel around for backup and troubleshooting. Certainly agree - I always keep at least one stock kernel installed. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120731132140.c346c2a5.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:04:44 -0400 Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 11:28 PM, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:21:37 -0400 Gary Dalegaryd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 10:52 PM, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400 Gary Dalegaryd...@rogers.com wrote: ... Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a non-bootable machine from a live CD. True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap HDDs. You still need to go through the aggravation of booting from a live CD then setting up a chroot environment just to get around the fact that you compiled a non-portable kernel. You wouldn't have to do any of that if you had just stuck with the stock kernel. I must have misunderstood what you meant. If machine A is non-bootable, then I need to recover using resources from machine B. But even if machine B generally runs my custom kernel, before I pull its HDD and move it to A, I can just add a stock kernel to B. Can you explain what you mean here? The reason machine A is not bootable is because a minor hardware change is capable of doing that with a custom kernel. I'm not talking about using a machine with a custom kernel to rescue another machine, I'm talking about the much greater chance that a machine with a custom kernel will need rescuing. Oh, okay. But this is just an argument for keeping at least one generic kernel on the machine, which I always do. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120731132951.5b8be76a.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
Hi, Atıf CEYLAN wrote: For example, my wireless card is not supported by debian wheezy standart kernel. Also non-free package is not working. So I compile it from source code and I change some part of the code (because some part of code is not working with my hardware). So I must make compiling :) If you have time to describe what breaks when you use the standard kernel, that would be welcome. Please use 'reportbug' with the name of the standard kernel package as an argument if interested. If the kernel team comes up with a potential fix, your ability to build your own kernel could be very useful. :) Thanks and hope that helps, Jonathan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120713222554.GA326@burratino
Re: Why compiling.
On Ma, 10 iul 12, 22:50:02, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:22:46 +0300 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite sure I get you - if my hypothetical router (running x86 HW, not like my actual routers that run OpenWRT on arm, and that don't have lots of extra MB to spare) needs a new kernel, I can just send over a distro stock one; From where? Your network is down and your other machine runs on a custom kernel. why should my work machine kernel need to be appropriate for my router? A stock kernel should work for both. IMHO, even if you do use custom kernels, it's probably a good idea to keep a stock kernel around for backup and troubleshooting. Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Why compiling.
On 11/07/12 01:06, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote: Howdy, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. It's all a matter of what you want. Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers, since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should work on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't remove too much. The key word there is usually... I run stock kernels on all my newer systems, but I have some old ones which it just won't work with. Therefore I compile my own. It's customised for those particular systems, so doesn't need to be portable. I always keep the previous known working version of a kernel on the system until I'm certain that the newly compiled one is stable, and if a system becomes unbootable I can usually recover by removing the hard disk and connecting it to a working system and fixing whatever the problem was. I realise that my situation is quite different to the average user with their 256GB/6GHz/128 bit systems ;-) -- Dom -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffd1f7b.8070...@rpdom.net
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 19:15 +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 08:03 AM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? Thanks, There is little need to compile code. In fact, doing so will probably have a negative impact on your system's stability, especially if you use other than the official sources. People who prepare the individual packages or distributions are usually the only ones who need to compile code. However, some brave/foolhardy souls must have the latest code from the developer's source and compile their own. This is invariably a bad idea. When you leave the safety of your distribution's code repositories, you become responsible for managing the various inter-dependencies between programs and libraries. This is not a trivial task. If you need later code than is available from the official repositories, look for backports or, in the case of Debian, move to testing. In the testing repositories you get up to date code that is somewhat stable for non-critical work. Compiling from the official sources is a slightly different issue. For example, some people will compile a custom kernel from the official sources to do one of several things: - create a kernel that doesn't need an initramfs - everything is built in - create a smaller kernel that contains only the options they need - rendering it non-portable - creating a kernel with non-standard options for a particular situation. Other code may need similar tweaking. I once compiled a CUPS driver for a printer to include a bug fix I needed that hadn't made it into SID yet. However, these situations are rare. For the vast majority of people, compiling is something you shouldn't worry about. The package maintainers do a great job of getting everything to work together properly. Don't undermine their work. noway i am undermining their work but i have heard that people do compile kernels and some time hardware vendors suggest users to compile their drivers from source though i couldn't get the idea of what they are discussing. so after reading your detailed answer things are crystal clear. i applicate the effort and i thank you for help. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffc344b.9040...@rogers.com For example, my wireless card is not supported by debian wheezy standart kernel. Also non-free package is not working. So I compile it from source code and I change some part of the code (because some part of code is not working with my hardware). So I must make compiling :) -- M.Atıf CEYLAN Yurdum Yazılım
Re: Why compiling.
2012/7/10 Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. Sometimes compiling kernel is needed because you want to add features not enabled in the stock kernel, some other because you want to remove features. eg. I am used to compile a vanilla kernel in order to obtain a RT one (vanilla sources + realtime patch http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/) doing this the debian-way. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? again, adding/removing features could be of some interest, don't know about samba but eg. when php was not shipped with gd support compiling was needed. just think about deb packages which do not include features not compliant with debian free software guidelines, so again you need to compile. eg. mapserver not shipped with ecw support because libecw is proprietary soft (now I believe is completely dead), so you should compile ecw and then gdal libs with ecw support enabled... Thanks regards -r -- *L'unica speranza di catarsi, ammesso che ne esista una, resta affidata all'istinto di ribellione, alla rivolta non isterilita in progetti, alla protesta violenta e viscerale. (V. Evangelisti) *
Re: Why compiling.
On 10/07/12 11:28 PM, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:21:37 -0400 Gary Dalegaryd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 10:52 PM, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400 Gary Dalegaryd...@rogers.com wrote: ... Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a non-bootable machine from a live CD. True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap HDDs. You still need to go through the aggravation of booting from a live CD then setting up a chroot environment just to get around the fact that you compiled a non-portable kernel. You wouldn't have to do any of that if you had just stuck with the stock kernel. I must have misunderstood what you meant. If machine A is non-bootable, then I need to recover using resources from machine B. But even if machine B generally runs my custom kernel, before I pull its HDD and move it to A, I can just add a stock kernel to B. Can you explain what you mean here? The reason machine A is not bootable is because a minor hardware change is capable of doing that with a custom kernel. I'm not talking about using a machine with a custom kernel to rescue another machine, I'm talking about the much greater chance that a machine with a custom kernel will need rescuing. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffd79ec.7070...@rogers.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 09:04 -0400, Gary Dale wrote: The reason machine A is not bootable is because a minor hardware change is capable of doing that with a custom kernel. +1 I almost exclusively use self-build kernels only, because I need them, but I don't drop too much hardware support, usually I try to use as much of the config of a distro's default kernel as possible. As somebody already mentioned, even on machines where RAM is an issue, there's no need to load all modules. Since compiling a kernel does take a long time, I would like to get rid of stuff I never ever will need, but to get rid of it IMO is too time consuming itself. My way is to copy a distro's kernel config, to patch my kernel, choose my settings (add what is needed and what must be removed) and to run make oldconfig. On disk the needed space can become an issue, when collecting many, many, many kernels, but one or a few kernels shouldn't be an issue. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1342014007.2072.55.camel@precise
Re: [OT] Re: Why compiling.
Am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 schrieb Camaleón: i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. That's a good example. I wanted to have a 3.5-rc5 kernel for testing. And it did compile in about 10 minutes here. ;) There is no need to tough, if you happy with packages just enjoy the work of the Debian packagers. I do not compile kernels for my older laptops at the moment. I compiled Freedroid RPG from SVN to try out new stuff. And Supertuxkart cause controller support had a bug in the version packaged in Debian back then. Basically for me usually its new not yet packaged upstream versions or software not packaged at all at the moment I want to try it. One reason for newer version are fixed bugs. I did not yet compile a complete KDE or so, but some individual applications. Sometimes I update an existing debian package for my own personal use and possibly upload it somewhere for others to try it out. That was what I did with Digikam at some time. Thanks, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112046.00832.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
Am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 schrieb Gary Dale: People who prepare the individual packages or distributions are usually the only ones who need to compile code. However, some brave/foolhardy souls must have the latest code from the developer's source and compile their own. This is invariably a bad idea. I do not agree to such a across-the-board black and white statement. It can be a bad idea, but it can be a good idea as well. Actually from what I got quite some packagers and developers started that way and without them you wouldn´t be able to enjoy the packages you install cause they wouldn´t exist. I compiled my first application and Linux kernel long before I created my first Debian package that got uploaded to the repository. I do agree that compiling applications to standard FHS application asks for trouble, but compiling a game in a directory in your home directories hardly has any chance to break your system. I tend to compile only to in my and to my home directory, /usr/local, /opt. Except for kernels which I use kernel-package´s make-kpkg, cause I never got around fully understanding the other more official way via kernel source packages. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112052.18562.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
Hallo Andrei, Am Dienstag, 10. Juli 2012 schrieb Andrei POPESCU: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote: And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from another machine ;) Nothing prevents you from having an own and distro kernel installed side by side as long as you do not use the official version appendices. I usually have: martin@merkaba:~ ls -1 /boot/vmlinuz-3.* /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-3-amd64 /boot/vmlinuz-3.4-trunk-amd64 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc4-tp520 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc5-tp520 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc6-tp520+ Pick yourself which are the distro ones ;). I always have two kernel versions installed, should one break during an upgrade. That aside: The kernel of my ASUS WL-500g Premium is certainly not a Debian distro standard one which might not even fit into that 8 MB of internal flash. Its not a self compiled one either cause I didn´t yet manage to get one build but I trusted a developer who compiled one for the machine (Debwrt). For that machine I am not aware of any Debian kernel which would work out of the box and is also in main Debian repositories. Ciao, -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112057.50124.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: [OT] Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 20:46 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: I did not yet compile a complete KDE Even compiling something simple as e17 without using a script is a PITA :D. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1342033204.2311.27.camel@precise
Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 09:04 -0400, Gary Dale wrote: The reason machine A is not bootable is because a minor hardware change is capable of doing that with a custom kernel. +1 I almost exclusively use self-build kernels only, because I need them, but I don't drop too much hardware support, usually I try to use as much of the config of a distro's default kernel as possible. As somebody already mentioned, even on machines where RAM is an issue, there's no need to load all modules. Since compiling a kernel does take a long time, I would like to get rid of stuff I never ever will need, but to get rid of it IMO is too time consuming itself. My way is to copy a distro's kernel config, to patch my kernel, choose my settings (add what is needed and what must be removed) and to run make oldconfig. On disk the needed space can become an issue, when collecting many, many, many kernels, but one or a few kernels shouldn't be an issue. That can be a good idea if the machine doesn´t boot a distro kernel and has no space constraints. If the machine can boot a distro kernel I´d just install one alongside your self-compiled kernel. If the machine has space constraints I´d have to pick options anyway. I usually also use the distro config, then strip out options for not needed fixed compoments. I know the SATA controller of this ThinkPad T520 and I now that the eSATA PCI express card uses a Silicon Image one. But for most plugable stuff I just build modules. Like in the official Debian kernel. Cause what I do I know do I want to plug in to one of the USB slots tomorrow? Granted the kernel is a one size fits all game for the majority of users, but not for everyone. And thats fine. The users who compile their own stuff do usually not affect the users who only use packages in any negative way, so there is no need to fight some kind of religious war about that. I didn´t think of you Ralf specifically here, you just describe your way. Thats fine with me. But it seems from what I read in this thread so far that this might be considered some kind of religious choice. Its not in my oppinion. My way, your way, their way can co-exist. Easily. Thats what the whole free software stuff is about. Thats the whole point of it. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112106.34403.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Andrei POPESCU: why should my work machine kernel need to be appropriate for my router? A stock kernel should work for both. IMHO, even if you do use custom kernels, it's probably a good idea to keep a stock kernel around for backup and troubleshooting. +1 If there is one available for the platform. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112107.29286.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote:
Howdy,
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote:
why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are
compiling kernel on debian.
what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year
and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no
need of compiling in this time window.
The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to
work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for
nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC.
I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my
computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller
disk footprint.
It's all a matter of what you want.
Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers,
since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we
perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need
different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should
work on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't
remove too much.
My somewhat trimmed down self-compiled kernel builds in about 10 minutes
here. The standard ones would take a bit longer.
martin@merkaba:~ ls -lh /boot/{vm,init}*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14M Jul 3 16:39 /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-3-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14M Jul 3 16:39 /boot/initrd.img-3.4-trunk-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,8M Jul 3 16:39 /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-rc4-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,7M Jul 10 10:34 /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-rc5-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,7M Jul 10 19:12 /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-rc6-tp520+
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2,7M Jun 28 13:23 /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-3-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2,8M Jun 26 20:19 /boot/vmlinuz-3.4-trunk-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3,4M Jun 26 14:07 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc4-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3,4M Jul 5 10:18 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc5-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3,4M Jul 10 19:10 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc6-tp520+
So thats convenient for me.
I do not try too hard to remove stuff from the kernel, but for some stuff
its just so obvious that I will not use it on a laptop that I risk having
to 10 minute recompile or boot into a distro kernel in that rare case.
Heck the kernel image is even larger. I think I put some stuff in it that
does not absolutely need to be in there.
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112111.48324.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Kumar Appaiah: On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 08:54:29AM -0700, Mike McClain wrote: The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. I'd like to get some proof of this. For many years, the Linux kernel has been modular, and, barring some filesystem support and similar, almost all hardware support is achieved by means of loadable modules. So, a module is loaded only if you have the hardware which has a need for it. This is why a stock Debian kernel will load the driver for just an Intel sound card if you have one, and not drivers for any other brands. However, tomorrow, when you switch out the sound card, the same kernel can support the new sound card without needing a rebuild. Please correct me if I have missed something here. I agree here. I do not think that building lots of modules raises boot time or memory footprint if they are not loaded. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112113.40234.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Raffaele Morelli: 2012/7/10 Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. Sometimes compiling kernel is needed because you want to add features not enabled in the stock kernel, some other because you want to remove features. Like TuxOnIce which is still way faster than in kernel hibernation: I talk about 500 MB/s write and 800 MB/s read speed with an Intel SSD 320, as compare to about 350 MB/s with in kernel hibernation. Although it still does some issues on this ThinkPad T520 so I switched to mainline kernel hibernation. Or I wanted to try latencytop again for my Linux Performance Analysis Tuning trainings. Option currently not enabled in Debian Wheezy/Sid kernels due to performance reasons (memory usage). I didn´t compile own kernels for about a year or so, but when I found out that its about 10 minutes on this machine I compiled some kernels again. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112117.39995.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: [OT] Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 20:46 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: I did not yet compile a complete KDE Even compiling something simple as e17 without using a script is a PITA :D. I don´t think that building KDE SC would be that complex, there are good scripts for it and cmake does its job as well. But its still huge and takes lots of space. I think huger than „just“ a kernel compile. I bet it would take some hours as well, even on this machine. With 16 GiB in /home and another 20 GiB free in another logical volume I do not want to do this at the moment. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112120.45339.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: [OT] Re: Why compiling.
Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: Am Mittwoch, 11. Juli 2012 schrieb Ralf Mardorf: On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 20:46 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote: I did not yet compile a complete KDE Even compiling something simple as e17 without using a script is a PITA :D. I don´t think that building KDE SC would be that complex, there are good scripts for it and cmake does its job as well. s/that complex/that PITA It likely is complex, but if someone has done some good scripting for it ;). -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201207112124.11940.mar...@lichtvoll.de
Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 21:11 +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
martin@merkaba:~ ls -lh /boot/{vm,init}*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14M Jul 3 16:39 /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-3-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14M Jul 3 16:39 /boot/initrd.img-3.4-trunk-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,8M Jul 3 16:39 /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-rc4-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,7M Jul 10 10:34 /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-rc5-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8,7M Jul 10 19:12 /boot/initrd.img-3.5.0-rc6-tp520+
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2,7M Jun 28 13:23 /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-3-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2,8M Jun 26 20:19 /boot/vmlinuz-3.4-trunk-amd64
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3,4M Jun 26 14:07 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc4-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3,4M Jul 5 10:18 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc5-tp520
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3,4M Jul 10 19:10 /boot/vmlinuz-3.5.0-rc6-tp520+
spinymouse@precise:~$ ls /boot -hAl
total 41M
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 772K Apr 11 04:38 abi-3.2.0-23-lowlatency
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 127K May 6 22:27 config-3.0.30
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 135K Apr 11 04:38 config-3.2.0-23-lowlatency
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 12K Jun 2 07:21 grub
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 13M May 7 01:04 initrd.img-3.0.30
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 14M May 7 01:05 initrd.img-3.2.0-23-lowlatency
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 173K Nov 27 2011 memtest86+.bin
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 175K Nov 27 2011 memtest86+_multiboot.bin
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2.5M May 7 00:14 System.map-3.0.30
-rw--- 1 root root 2.8M Apr 11 04:38 System.map-3.2.0-23-lowlatency
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4.2M May 7 00:14 vmlinuz-3.0.30
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4.4M Apr 25 19:39 vmlinuz-3.2.0-23-lowlatency
It takes around 90 minutes with concurrency level 2, on a 2.1GHz
dual-core amd64, 4GB RAM here :(.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1342034748.2311.38.camel@precise
Why compiling.
This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? Thanks, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAGWVfM=vwd6hvuuc2wyfsiqzexqr3nl9r7cnsh2+r_bj6mu...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
People do compilation for many reason. They want to learn more. They want to run packages from source code. If you are going to compile kernel from source you can learn more details about kernel. On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.comwrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? Thanks, -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAGWVfM=vwd6hvuuc2wyfsiqzexqr3nl9r7cnsh2+r_bj6mu...@mail.gmail.com -- Wishing you the very best of everything, always!!! Kousik Maiti(কৌশিক মাইতি) Registered Linux User #474025 Registered Ubuntu User # 28654
Re: Why compiling.
On 10/07/12 08:03 AM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? Thanks, There is little need to compile code. In fact, doing so will probably have a negative impact on your system's stability, especially if you use other than the official sources. People who prepare the individual packages or distributions are usually the only ones who need to compile code. However, some brave/foolhardy souls must have the latest code from the developer's source and compile their own. This is invariably a bad idea. When you leave the safety of your distribution's code repositories, you become responsible for managing the various inter-dependencies between programs and libraries. This is not a trivial task. If you need later code than is available from the official repositories, look for backports or, in the case of Debian, move to testing. In the testing repositories you get up to date code that is somewhat stable for non-critical work. Compiling from the official sources is a slightly different issue. For example, some people will compile a custom kernel from the official sources to do one of several things: - create a kernel that doesn't need an initramfs - everything is built in - create a smaller kernel that contains only the options they need - rendering it non-portable - creating a kernel with non-standard options for a particular situation. Other code may need similar tweaking. I once compiled a CUPS driver for a printer to include a bug fix I needed that hadn't made it into SID yet. However, these situations are rare. For the vast majority of people, compiling is something you shouldn't worry about. The package maintainers do a great job of getting everything to work together properly. Don't undermine their work. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffc344b.9040...@rogers.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 08:03 AM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? Thanks, There is little need to compile code. In fact, doing so will probably have a negative impact on your system's stability, especially if you use other than the official sources. People who prepare the individual packages or distributions are usually the only ones who need to compile code. However, some brave/foolhardy souls must have the latest code from the developer's source and compile their own. This is invariably a bad idea. When you leave the safety of your distribution's code repositories, you become responsible for managing the various inter-dependencies between programs and libraries. This is not a trivial task. If you need later code than is available from the official repositories, look for backports or, in the case of Debian, move to testing. In the testing repositories you get up to date code that is somewhat stable for non-critical work. Compiling from the official sources is a slightly different issue. For example, some people will compile a custom kernel from the official sources to do one of several things: - create a kernel that doesn't need an initramfs - everything is built in - create a smaller kernel that contains only the options they need - rendering it non-portable - creating a kernel with non-standard options for a particular situation. Other code may need similar tweaking. I once compiled a CUPS driver for a printer to include a bug fix I needed that hadn't made it into SID yet. However, these situations are rare. For the vast majority of people, compiling is something you shouldn't worry about. The package maintainers do a great job of getting everything to work together properly. Don't undermine their work. noway i am undermining their work but i have heard that people do compile kernels and some time hardware vendors suggest users to compile their drivers from source though i couldn't get the idea of what they are discussing. so after reading your detailed answer things are crystal clear. i applicate the effort and i thank you for help. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffc344b.9040...@rogers.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAGWVfMkBb-75qtVB=VDFWx5=vhv5zy6ptdapgw5rrwd_p2t...@mail.gmail.com
[OT] Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:03:12 +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. For many reasons but mainly because there are no binaries available for your system and you have to get the sources and build a package. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. That's a good example. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. I don't like compiling so much within my main systems, it requires many libraries and packages to be installed in the system and I prefer to keep packaging at the bare minimum... so then, why I compile a kernel? Mainly for debugging purposes. For instance, I have many problems with my wireless card that uses several kernel modules (brcmsmac, cordic, crdca, brcmutils, mac80211...) and I need to try either a) patches that solve my reconnect problems or b) updated versions of these modules, thus I need compiling a new kernel. People also compile kernels because that's the only way to get the latest upstream kernel and latest kernels usually provide support for new devices or have nice functionalities not present in older reelases. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? When all works fine there's usually no need to compile things. People compile becasue they want to add a new feature not present in the current binary (for example, they want samba with a determined flag or parameter on/off), to solve a problem/bug or to apply a patch, etc... Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jthdli$cnl$5...@dough.gmane.org
Re: [OT] Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:03:12 +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. For many reasons but mainly because there are no binaries available for your system and you have to get the sources and build a package. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. That's a good example. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. I don't like compiling so much within my main systems, it requires many libraries and packages to be installed in the system and I prefer to keep packaging at the bare minimum... so then, why I compile a kernel? Mainly for debugging purposes. For instance, I have many problems with my wireless card that uses several kernel modules (brcmsmac, cordic, crdca, brcmutils, mac80211...) and I need to try either a) patches that solve my reconnect problems or b) updated versions of these modules, thus I need compiling a new kernel. People also compile kernels because that's the only way to get the latest upstream kernel and latest kernels usually provide support for new devices or have nice functionalities not present in older reelases. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? When all works fine there's usually no need to compile things. People compile becasue they want to add a new feature not present in the current binary (for example, they want samba with a determined flag or parameter on/off), to solve a problem/bug or to apply a patch, etc... Thanks very informative :) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jthdli$cnl$5...@dough.gmane.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAGWVfM=ahx5navjw711y-fpza1-k-ausqt7gkiwo7v0v6z5...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 09:55:23 -0400 Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 08:03 AM, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: This is a very basic question but confusing me for very long. so i need your help. why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? Thanks, There is little need to compile code. In fact, doing so will probably have a negative impact on your system's stability, especially if you use other than the official sources. Here's my case: I run Stable + Backports, and I want aircrack. It isn't in Stable, and trying to install it from Sid will force me to upgrade all kinds of core libraries. [I haven't actually tried compiling it yet, and for all I know, it may have real dependencies on the later libraries.] People who prepare the individual packages or distributions are usually the only ones who need to compile code. However, some brave/foolhardy souls must have the latest code from the developer's source and compile their own. This is invariably a bad idea. When you leave the safety of your distribution's code repositories, you become responsible for managing the various inter-dependencies between programs and libraries. This is not a trivial task. If you need later code than is available from the official repositories, look for backports or, in the case of Debian, move to testing. In the testing repositories you get up to date code that is somewhat stable for non-critical work. aircrack isn't in testing. Compiling from the official sources is a slightly different issue. For example, some people will compile a custom kernel from the official sources to do one of several things: - create a kernel that doesn't need an initramfs - everything is built in - create a smaller kernel that contains only the options they need - rendering it non-portable And to get rid of all sorts of code that is irrelevant to my machine, which doesn't even have the hardware for most of it. There are surely also security benefits from not having all kinds of superfluous kernel mode code hanging around. And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? ... However, these situations are rare. For the vast majority of people, compiling is something you shouldn't worry about. The package maintainers do a great job of getting everything to work together properly. Don't undermine their work. I certainly agree that compiling is rarely necessary, and ofter / usually a bad idea. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710150852.7fb671ec.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 17:03 +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: [snip] i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. Some kernels with special patches are not always available for Debian. Sometimes e.g. a kernel-rt is available, but sometimes it isn't. If e.g. a kernel-rt should be available by a repository, I still might optimize to e.g. the CPU I'm using. [snip] secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? I compile software myself for at least three reasons. 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do translations. Until now I never finished a translation. 2. Some software is missing functionality that works good enough for my needs and sometimes software from git does provide the quality I need. 3. No distro can fit to everybody needs, you might need to get rid of dependencies that make Linux unable to be used with e.g. professional audio software. Some people perhaps wish to learn/play. Since self-responsibility is wanted, this could be a good way to learn more about Linux, it also could break an install, but even this could help to learn more about Linux. Others maybe are hunting for latest versions only, this IMO is idiotic. Sometimes I would be able to compile very old versions, because I prefer those versions, this unfortunately isn't that easy to do. I'm not programming for Linux. I did program older computers, however, many people help programming, other people take care that FLOSS isn't malicious, they might need to compile with special flags set, dunno, but there are tons of reasons to compile FLOSS software ourself. - Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341948831.2288.40.camel@precise
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 21:33 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 17:03 +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: [snip] i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. Some kernels with special patches are not always available for Debian. Sometimes e.g. a kernel-rt is available, but sometimes it isn't. If e.g. a kernel-rt should be available by a repository, I still might optimize to e.g. the CPU I'm using. [snip] secondly i have read that people are compiling Squid SAMBA and all the other packages but why. i am using KVM, squid samba etc for almost more then 1 year and all the servers are providing me what ever i asled all the services are very comprehensive and could be fit in any environment then why compiling? I compile software myself for at least three reasons. 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do translations. Until now I never finished a translation. 2. Some software is missing functionality that works good enough for my needs and sometimes software from git does provide the quality I need. 3. No distro can fit to everybody needs, you might need to get rid of dependencies that make Linux unable to be used with e.g. professional audio software. ^ hardware ;) Some people perhaps wish to learn/play. Since self-responsibility is wanted, this could be a good way to learn more about Linux, it also could break an install, but even this could help to learn more about Linux. Others maybe are hunting for latest versions only, this IMO is idiotic. Sometimes I would be able to compile very old versions, because I prefer those versions, this unfortunately isn't that easy to do. I'm not programming for Linux. I did program older computers, however, many people help programming, other people take care that FLOSS isn't malicious, they might need to compile with special flags set, dunno, but there are tons of reasons to compile FLOSS software ourself. - Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341948950.2288.41.camel@precise
Re: Why compiling.
On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote: And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from another machine ;) Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Why compiling.
On Ma, 10 iul 12, 21:33:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I compile software myself for at least three reasons. 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do translations. Until now I never finished a translation. Do you mean for Qtractor or in general? As far as I know you don't need to compile the software if it uses gettext, you just copy the .mo files where needed. Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 23:28 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 21:33:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote: I compile software myself for at least three reasons. 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do translations. Until now I never finished a translation. Do you mean for Qtractor or in general? As far as I know you don't need to compile the software if it uses gettext, you just copy the .mo files where needed. Qt Linguist can't show text for code that isn't already programmed. So when doing a translation you need to compile, each time new text was added by the coder. IIRC for Qt Linguist we need to generate some file(s) during compiling, I guess it's not possible to get the file(s) without compiling. I suspect compiling is needed for Qt based software. - Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341953018.2288.51.camel@precise
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 22:43 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 23:28 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Ma, 10 iul 12, 21:33:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
I compile software myself for at least three reasons.
1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do
it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do
translations. Until now I never finished a translation.
Do you mean for Qtractor or in general? As far as I know you don't need
to compile the software if it uses gettext, you just copy the .mo files
where needed.
Qt Linguist can't show text for code that isn't already programmed. So
when doing a translation you need to compile, each time new text was
added by the coder. IIRC for Qt Linguist we need to generate some
file(s) during compiling, I guess it's not possible to get the file(s)
without compiling.
I suspect compiling is needed for Qt based software.
PS:
I never finished a translation, hopefully I'll finish a translation this
or next year :S.
##
You need to tell that there is a new translation:
$
cat /mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor/qtractor-0.5.3.15-de_translation-1.patch
Index: Makefile.in
===
--- Makefile.in (revision 3006)
+++ Makefile.in (working copy)
@@ -263,10 +263,12 @@
src/qtractor.qrc
translations_sources = \
- src/translations/qtractor_cs.ts
+ src/translations/qtractor_cs.ts \
+ src/translations/qtractor_de.ts
translations_targets = \
- src/translations/qtractor_cs.qm
+ src/translations/qtractor_cs.qm \
+ src/translations/qtractor_de.qm
export datarootdir = @datarootdir@
Index: src/src.pro
===
--- src/src.pro (revision 3006)
+++ src/src.pro (working copy)
@@ -272,7 +272,8 @@
qtractor.qrc
TRANSLATIONS += \
- translations/qtractor_cs.ts
+ translations/qtractor_cs.ts \
+ translations/qtractor_de.ts
unix {
Index: TRANSLATORS
===
--- TRANSLATORS (revision 3006)
+++ TRANSLATORS (working copy)
@@ -1,2 +1,5 @@
Czech (cs)
Pavel Fric pavelf...@seznam.cz
+
+German (de)
+ Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net
##
The files are *.ts files
$ ls /mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_*
/mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_de.ts.bak-1
/mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_de.ts.bak-empty
/mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_de.ts.bak-2
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341953535.2288.55.camel@precise
Re: Why compiling.
On 10/07/12 04:22 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote: And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from another machine ;) Kind regards, Andrei Or if you need to change your hardware. Or if you want to use your drive to boot another machine - such as for testing or demonstration purposes. Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a non-bootable machine from a live CD. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffcb8a5.2030...@rogers.com
Re: Why compiling.
Howdy, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. It's all a matter of what you want. Mike -- Satisfied user of Linux since 1997. O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710155429.GA20755@playground
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote: Howdy, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. It's all a matter of what you want. Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers, since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should work on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't remove too much. 2 Cents, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341965162.2288.107.camel@precise
Re: Why compiling.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 02:06:02 +0200 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote: Howdy, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. It's all a matter of what you want. Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers, since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should work on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't remove too much. Then I'll reboot into a distro stock kernel, or rebuild. Don't forget, that on the modern hardware everyone is talking about, rebuilding a kernel is a fairly swift process. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710224748.9f15edd2.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:22:46 +0300 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com wrote: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote: And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from another machine ;) Not quite sure I get you - if my hypothetical router (running x86 HW, not like my actual routers that run OpenWRT on arm, and that don't have lots of extra MB to spare) needs a new kernel, I can just send over a distro stock one; why should my work machine kernel need to be appropriate for my router? Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710225002.e75ed475.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400 Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 04:22 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote: And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from another machine ;) Kind regards, Andrei Or if you need to change your hardware. Or if you want to use your drive to boot another machine - such as for testing or demonstration purposes. Well, you were the one suggesting that one only needs a custom kernel for special, unusual cases. I daresay that for most users of linux, removing a HDD to boot another machine for testing or demonstration purposes is rather a special case ... Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a non-bootable machine from a live CD. True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap HDDs. Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710225230.301454b7.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On 10/07/12 10:52 PM, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400 Gary Dalegaryd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 04:22 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote: And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a specific machine is portable? Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from another machine ;) Kind regards, Andrei Or if you need to change your hardware. Or if you want to use your drive to boot another machine - such as for testing or demonstration purposes. Well, you were the one suggesting that one only needs a custom kernel for special, unusual cases. I daresay that for most users of linux, removing a HDD to boot another machine for testing or demonstration purposes is rather a special case ... Not really. Linux isn't Windows where you need to install onto each machine. Booting from a temporarily attached HD proves the concept then a quick dd gets you up and running. Some people do this from a USB or e-SATA drive, with full read-write capability that is often lacking from USB stick / live CDs. Of course, the more normal problem is that you're trying to recover from a hardware failure or upgrade and your custom kernel no longer boots. Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a non-bootable machine from a live CD. True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap HDDs. You still need to go through the aggravation of booting from a live CD then setting up a chroot environment just to get around the fact that you compiled a non-portable kernel. You wouldn't have to do any of that if you had just stuck with the stock kernel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffcf141.4010...@rogers.com
Re: Why compiling.
On 10/07/12 10:47 PM, Celejar wrote: On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 02:06:02 +0200 Ralf Mardorfralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote: On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote: Howdy, On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are compiling kernel on debian. what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of compiling in this time window. The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. It's all a matter of what you want. Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers, since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should work on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't remove too much. Then I'll reboot into a distro stock kernel, or rebuild. Don't forget, that on the modern hardware everyone is talking about, rebuilding a kernel is a fairly swift process. A pointless exercise since the difference in boot speed is negligible and far less than the time wasted compiling the custom kernel to begin with. You're thinking like a hobbyist who enjoys tinkering with their computer. If you value up-time, you'll stick to the stock kernel. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ffcf221.1060...@rogers.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:21:37 -0400 Gary Dale garyd...@rogers.com wrote: On 10/07/12 10:52 PM, Celejar wrote: On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400 Gary Dalegaryd...@rogers.com wrote: ... Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a non-bootable machine from a live CD. True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap HDDs. You still need to go through the aggravation of booting from a live CD then setting up a chroot environment just to get around the fact that you compiled a non-portable kernel. You wouldn't have to do any of that if you had just stuck with the stock kernel. I must have misunderstood what you meant. If machine A is non-bootable, then I need to recover using resources from machine B. But even if machine B generally runs my custom kernel, before I pull its HDD and move it to A, I can just add a stock kernel to B. Can you explain what you mean here? Celejar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120710232849.f4ea25a1.cele...@gmail.com
Re: Why compiling.
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 08:54:29AM -0700, Mike McClain wrote: The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece of hardware that can be installed in a PC. I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer. This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint. I'd like to get some proof of this. For many years, the Linux kernel has been modular, and, barring some filesystem support and similar, almost all hardware support is achieved by means of loadable modules. So, a module is loaded only if you have the hardware which has a need for it. This is why a stock Debian kernel will load the driver for just an Intel sound card if you have one, and not drivers for any other brands. However, tomorrow, when you switch out the sound card, the same kernel can support the new sound card without needing a rebuild. Please correct me if I have missed something here. Thanks. Kumar -- If you want to travel around the world and be invited to speak at a lot of different places, just write a Unix operating system. (By Linus Torvalds) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120711041248.ga7...@bluemoon.alumni.iitm.ac.in
