[gentoo-user] hibernation
Hello there, I use i3 as my window manager and use xfce4-power-manager for saving battery and stuff on my laptop. Today I tried hibernation for the first time and realized: it does not work. All I did so far was installing fce4-power-manager selecting some sections in kernel config that seemed necessary and installed polkit. However when I close my notebook's lid (I configured xfce4-power-manager to switch into hibernation in this case) it shuts down, but when i press the start button, it just does a normal restart. What am I missing? Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] hibernation
On Dec 3, 2014 11:33 AM, Michael Vetter michael.vet...@uni-konstanz.de wrote: Hello there, I use i3 as my window manager and use xfce4-power-manager for saving battery and stuff on my laptop. Today I tried hibernation for the first time and realized: it does not work. All I did so far was installing fce4-power-manager selecting some sections in kernel config that seemed necessary and installed polkit. However when I close my notebook's lid (I configured xfce4-power-manager to switch into hibernation in this case) it shuts down, but when i press the start button, it just does a normal restart. What am I missing? Michael Maybe you need to pass the resume-partition parameter to the kernel in the bootloader. Point it to your swap device. You can boot normal with this parameter set and not hibernated
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Custom ebuilds for CoreOS
On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 02:39:53 AM Mark David Dumlao wrote: Why do I get the feeling that this is another episode of the i hate LennartSoft(tm) too circlejerk on the gentoo mailing list? Why do I get the feeling you just want another flamewar? I don't see any mention of systemd or anything else written by Lennart, apart from your comment. this mailing list used to be about gentoo. It still is. On Dec 3, 2014 1:38 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes: is integration of the best of the CoreOS ideas into Gentoo proper. I'm not suggesting that /usr types of systems are going away. I'm just pointing out that they're not really the focus of CoreOS (hosting them inside containers is, but not running these kinds of applications in the host itself). I do not intend to follow the CoreOS commercial path. It intend to mod gentoo to achieve those attractive attributes back into my gentoo proper. tftp, pxe, dhcp, uefi and many other tools give us a path to running the least (embedded) to the most (complex traditional server) as an extension (compliment) to the cluster. So as was pointed out, I'm merely lifting form CoreOS what they lifted from their predicessors; no more no less. I see the gentoo admins being able to move hardrware in and out of the cluster, dynamically and being able to run many sorts of gentoo systems (embedded to fulls server) on a myriad of hardware they own and control. You seem to be wanting a minimalist profile of Gentoo, not CoreOS. YES!, I want Gentoo to CRUSH CoreOS because we can and our goal is not to deceptively move users to a rent the binary jail. OK? think many of us would love to see that, and I've been an advocate of paring down at system for just this reason. I just wouldn't use the term CoreOS with that as this is going to lead to confusion. CoreOS is a specialized distro intended to host containers, no more, no less. OK, we see CoreOS differently. For me it was an Epiphany moment of where I'm been trying to end up, with the aforementioned Gentoo twists. It isn't intended as a starting point for embedded projects or such. Sure, maybe you could make it work, but sooner or later CoreOS will make some change that will make you very unhappy because they aren't making it for you. CoreOS will never be in my critical path. Large corporations will turn computer scientist and hackers into WalMart type-employees. Conglomerates are the enemy, imho. I fear Conglomerates much more than any group of government idiots. ymmv. (warning digression) Just look at the entire net neutrality turf struggle. That sort of corner the market monopolistic behavior would not be possible, if we had just maintained the MAE precedence for network peering. Obama had little choice; but, putting networks under SS7 style telecom regulations is a deceptive and horrible idea. Conglomerates lobby congress and get very bad ideas written into law. All we needed is regulation to allow (force) all networks to peer with other networks. The entire concept of private peering is horseshit and it should be ended immediately. CoreOS and the Cloud lobbyist can easily get regulations passed to put an end to this linux experiment, imho. Differnt subject I know, but the tactics of conglomerates are always the same. Roll up competition and eliminate it, oh all in the name of better security and portecting our 1st amendment rights and our conglomerates. (sorry of the digression). But, again, I'm all for a more lightweight Gentoo profile that doesn't bundle stuff like openssh, or even an init implementation (since we have several to choose from now). Funny, ssh is one of a few things I would put into drastically reduce @system. ymmv, unless you are going to add something like netconsole.c back into the bundle. I do not see my vision of the cluster (CoreOS insprired) to be limiting to anyone at Gentoo. Not the embedded folks, not the mimalist, not any init-camp, not the devs, hackers, or wannabees. And certainly not the users. Is this a large undertaking? Certainly. Are the pieces mostly already in existence, just scattered about and transversing time? (methinks YES). It all depends on how your vision works. Being older, I see a return to massive diskless nodes being what CoreOS and the entire Cloud Vendor conglomerates want. Conversely, I see those cheap microP now accompanied by enormous amount of ram and SSD that is dirt cheap forming the building blocks for the Gentoo cluster paradigm shift. I see Gentoo smashing that Cloud-vendor CoreOS paradigm by provide what they offer and so much more (full /usr systems) out of the same core codebase. I see Gentoo keeping the rank and file computer scientists and hackers, gamefully employed. I see the CoreOS folks
Re: [gentoo-user] hibernation
On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 11:32:10 AM Michael Vetter wrote: Hello there, I use i3 as my window manager and use xfce4-power-manager for saving battery and stuff on my laptop. Today I tried hibernation for the first time and realized: it does not work. All I did so far was installing fce4-power-manager selecting some sections in kernel config that seemed necessary and installed polkit. However when I close my notebook's lid (I configured xfce4-power-manager to switch into hibernation in this case) it shuts down, but when i press the start button, it just does a normal restart. What am I missing? Michael To test hibernate try the following: 1) Stop all important stuff 2) run the following as root: # echo disk /sys/power/state If this works, then you can try to configure a power management tool. Please also ensure you only have 1 power management tool configured. -- Joost
Re: [gentoo-user] hibernation
Am 03.12.2014 um 11:32 schrieb Michael Vetter: However when I close my notebook's lid (I configured xfce4-power-manager to switch into hibernation in this case) it shuts down, but when i press the start button, it just does a normal restart. Do you want to configure a) simply hibernation, which means that the RAM is still powered by your battery and just the rest of the computer is being switched off (CPU, HDDs and so on) or b) suspend to disk, which means that the whole content of the RAM is being written on your HDD and after that your computer is being shut down entirely?
[gentoo-user] Re: virus/malware scanner for linux
Neil Bothwick neil at digimed.co.uk writes: Virus scanner: ClamAV Malware scanner: rkhunter This thread motivated me to read a bit. What do folks think about net-analyzer/openvas ? Any experinces are welcome. curiously, James
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Custom ebuilds for CoreOS
Look up. the very first post contrastd coreos' systemd as opposed to openrc, bringing words like evilution into the park. later on we hear that coreos is stealing gentoo's ideas and hope that it is CRUSHED. but why? its its own frigging distro now. not gentoo by a long shot. On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 02:39:53 AM Mark David Dumlao wrote: Why do I get the feeling that this is another episode of the i hate LennartSoft(tm) too circlejerk on the gentoo mailing list? Why do I get the feeling you just want another flamewar? I don't see any mention of systemd or anything else written by Lennart, apart from your comment. this mailing list used to be about gentoo. It still is. On Dec 3, 2014 1:38 AM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote: Rich Freeman rich0 at gentoo.org writes: is integration of the best of the CoreOS ideas into Gentoo proper. I'm not suggesting that /usr types of systems are going away. I'm just pointing out that they're not really the focus of CoreOS (hosting them inside containers is, but not running these kinds of applications in the host itself). I do not intend to follow the CoreOS commercial path. It intend to mod gentoo to achieve those attractive attributes back into my gentoo proper. tftp, pxe, dhcp, uefi and many other tools give us a path to running the least (embedded) to the most (complex traditional server) as an extension (compliment) to the cluster. So as was pointed out, I'm merely lifting form CoreOS what they lifted from their predicessors; no more no less. I see the gentoo admins being able to move hardrware in and out of the cluster, dynamically and being able to run many sorts of gentoo systems (embedded to fulls server) on a myriad of hardware they own and control. You seem to be wanting a minimalist profile of Gentoo, not CoreOS. YES!, I want Gentoo to CRUSH CoreOS because we can and our goal is not to deceptively move users to a rent the binary jail. OK? think many of us would love to see that, and I've been an advocate of paring down at system for just this reason. I just wouldn't use the term CoreOS with that as this is going to lead to confusion. CoreOS is a specialized distro intended to host containers, no more, no less. OK, we see CoreOS differently. For me it was an Epiphany moment of where I'm been trying to end up, with the aforementioned Gentoo twists. It isn't intended as a starting point for embedded projects or such. Sure, maybe you could make it work, but sooner or later CoreOS will make some change that will make you very unhappy because they aren't making it for you. CoreOS will never be in my critical path. Large corporations will turn computer scientist and hackers into WalMart type-employees. Conglomerates are the enemy, imho. I fear Conglomerates much more than any group of government idiots. ymmv. (warning digression) Just look at the entire net neutrality turf struggle. That sort of corner the market monopolistic behavior would not be possible, if we had just maintained the MAE precedence for network peering. Obama had little choice; but, putting networks under SS7 style telecom regulations is a deceptive and horrible idea. Conglomerates lobby congress and get very bad ideas written into law. All we needed is regulation to allow (force) all networks to peer with other networks. The entire concept of private peering is horseshit and it should be ended immediately. CoreOS and the Cloud lobbyist can easily get regulations passed to put an end to this linux experiment, imho. Differnt subject I know, but the tactics of conglomerates are always the same. Roll up competition and eliminate it, oh all in the name of better security and portecting our 1st amendment rights and our conglomerates. (sorry of the digression). But, again, I'm all for a more lightweight Gentoo profile that doesn't bundle stuff like openssh, or even an init implementation (since we have several to choose from now). Funny, ssh is one of a few things I would put into drastically reduce @system. ymmv, unless you are going to add something like netconsole.c back into the bundle. I do not see my vision of the cluster (CoreOS insprired) to be limiting to anyone at Gentoo. Not the embedded folks, not the mimalist, not any init-camp, not the devs, hackers, or wannabees. And certainly not the users. Is this a large undertaking? Certainly. Are the pieces mostly already in existence, just scattered about and transversing time? (methinks YES). It all depends on how your vision works. Being older, I see a return to massive diskless nodes being what CoreOS and the entire Cloud Vendor conglomerates want. Conversely, I see those cheap microP now accompanied by enormous amount of ram and SSD that is dirt cheap forming the building blocks for the Gentoo cluster paradigm shift. I see Gentoo
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Custom ebuilds for CoreOS
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: but why? its its own frigging distro now. not gentoo by a long shot. I think it is actually a compliment to the flexibility of Gentoo that these derivatives are so different. Gentoo is a somewhat-generic linux distro overall - in its default install it isn't too different from Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/Arch on the surface and in terms of typical package selection. However, ChromeOS and CoreOS are very non-traditional linux distros. When people ask me what Gentoo is good for I of course talk about enthusiasts who care about both understanding their systems and having a high degree of control, but I also talk about projects where you're trying to blaze new trails and departing significantly from the typical linux desktop or LAMP box. If all you want is a stable LAMP box then honestly you're probably better off with the likes of Debian/CentOS/etc. However, if you're doing something embedded, or trying to change the world, then starting with Gentoo gives you a lot more flexibility to blaze new ground while not having to build EVERYTHING from scratch. So, when people use Gentoo to do things that we personally don't find useful, I think it is just a testimony to the fact that we've actually accomplished one of our core missions: empowering our users to make their own choices. -- Rich
[gentoo-user] Re: Custom ebuilds for CoreOS
Mark David Dumlao madumlao at gmail.com writes: Look up. the very first post contrastd coreos' systemd as opposed to openrc, bringing words like evilution into the park. That refers to the concept of conglomerates vs the people. Systemd is only mentioned in passing. If it offends you, ignore it, OK? I did not see any of the openrc camp chime in. Besides, as was pointed out later on we hear that coreos is stealing gentoo's ideas and hope that it is CRUSHED. That references my long history with large corporations, like the MAE system that worked fine until the US congress gave the (US) internet to the conglomerate Telcos; and I issued a warning about that rant. It was only to substantiate what conglomerates do to otherwise wonderful open source projects, imho. but why? its its own frigging distro now. not gentoo by a long shot. Many have stated that CoreOS is a gentoo (certainly inspired) derivative. The focus of MY THREAD is the ideas and technologies that CoreOS has lifted from Gentoo and my search for a robust Clustering paradigm that is gentoo centric and thusly landed squarely where CoreOS is. I have found many legacy codes that did the same thing as what CoreOS is doing, but for one reason or another they were abondoned. On Wednesday, December 03, 2014 02:39:53 AM Mark David Dumlao wrote: Why do I get the feeling that this is another episode of the i hate LennartSoft(tm) too circlejerk on the gentoo mailing list? Why do I get the feeling you just want another flamewar? I don't see any mention of systemd or anything else written by Lennart, apart from your comment. This is correct, but, very sad. Since Gentoo is openly supporting OpenRC, I'm staying with Gentoo. If I want a thread on Systemd, I'll be sure to put it in the title. If systemd is casually mentioned, please don't get your panties in a bunch, EVERYONE, as systemd is going to fine and the other init centric folks will be fine too. this mailing list used to be about gentoo. It still is. AGREED. I do not intend to follow the CoreOS commercial path. I intend to mod gentoo to achieve those attractive attributes back into my gentoo proper. Boy, this and many other theme sentences pretty much spell out my interest in this thread. If anyone researches gentoo's history there was a rich environment on HPC, distributed, and clusters; somehow it all was allowed to atrophy and I do not find any valid reasons. My science/math needs dictate to me a need for a robust cluster based on Gentoo. My embedded needs dictate a need for a gentoo cluster. The deprecation of Tinderbox at Gentoo strongly suggests a need for a gentoo cluster. My routine admin needs dictate a need for a Gentoo Cluster. My girlfriend likes the idea of a Gentoo cluster. CoreOS is nothing more than something where I can robb original gentoo thunder from, for my gentoo cluster. Other than that, I do see CoreOS and it's primary sponsers, as *EVIL* OK? ymmv. And finally, I think that alll init systems are going to become very irrelevant in the next few years, as what they provide, can be passed from a *personal cluster* to any and all hardware, dymanically. That's what the cell phones (smart phones) do now. That is what the NSA has been doing for over a decade now. In fact that is what most all major nation states have been doing for a very long time. It's been game set match at the transistor level and with numerous back doors in the Rf domain, hidden deeply in the Rf noise domain for decades. Historically it was called signal intercept. Do your research or find an accomplished EE with a few decades of experience in Rf and listen to them. It's old hat. Get real. Systemd is a piss_ant and is irrelevant, IMO! Openrc is not in my critical path either, although I have a very, very strong affection to it. It's called loyalty and much of the symbiotic relational world is build upon loyalty. Some do not understand this, and I cannot help those folks that do not understand loyalty. So, let's focus on modernizing Gentoo, shall we? OK? (focus dude, focus). hth, James
[gentoo-user] Re: The future of linux, and Gentoo specifically now
On 2014-11-26, Gevisz gev...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:02:49 + (UTC) Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2014-11-25, Maxim Wexler maxim.wex...@gmail.com wrote: No. It is not possible in Unity or, at least, it was not possible in Unity at the time when Ubuntu 12.04 was released. They really *forced* their users to accept the new place of the closing window frame button and have argued that it is more ergonomic. There was not any possibility to change the place of the closing window frame button in Unity via configuration options. Quite a lot of Ubuntu users complained about it yet in Ubuntu 10.04, where the new place of that button was a new default though it was possible to change it back via configuration options. In Unity, it was absolutely impossible. Try Lubuntu, with LXDE. Or Xubuntu with XFCE. I prefer Gentoo over Ubuntu for a host of other reasons, but switching from Ubuntu to Gentoo just to get a different desktop seems like overkill. Strange enough but according to the information from the DistroWatch.com Ubuntu lost a lot of users and its status of the most popular Linux distribution after switching from Gnome2 to Unity in its 12.04 LTS release. And its not about a small change in an interface, it is about we-know-better-what-you-need approach that drove quite a lot of companies to bankrupcy. That's one of the big reasons I do prefer Gentoo. Ubuntu is great as long as you want to do everything the Ubuntu Way. The minute you want to do something slightly different, it turns into a long hard swim upstream. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! I love ROCK 'N ROLL! at I memorized the all WORDS gmail.comto WIPE-OUT in 1965!!
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Custom ebuilds for CoreOS
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014, Rich Freeman wrote: On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Mark David Dumlao madum...@gmail.com wrote: but why? its its own frigging distro now. not gentoo by a long shot. I think it is actually a compliment to the flexibility of Gentoo that these derivatives are so different. Gentoo is a somewhat-generic linux distro overall - in its default install it isn't too different from Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/Arch on the surface and in terms of typical package selection. However, ChromeOS and CoreOS are very non-traditional linux distros. When people ask me what Gentoo is good for I of course talk about enthusiasts who care about both understanding their systems and having a high degree of control, but I also talk about projects where you're trying to blaze new trails and departing significantly from the typical linux desktop or LAMP box. If all you want is a stable LAMP box then honestly you're probably better off with the likes of Debian/CentOS/etc. However, if you're doing something embedded, or trying to change the world, then starting with Gentoo gives you a lot more flexibility to blaze new ground while not having to build EVERYTHING from scratch. So, when people use Gentoo to do things that we personally don't find useful, I think it is just a testimony to the fact that we've actually accomplished one of our core missions: empowering our users to make their own choices. +1 more power to you Rich. thanks Saifi.
[gentoo-user] Trouble updating shotwell
Two of my machines cannot update media-gfx/shotwell; the other two can update it. On the failing machines there are many lines in build.log saying /bin/sh: xml2po: command not found and many pairs of lines saying msgfmt: po/he.po: warning: PO file header fuzzy warning: older versions of msgfmt will give an error on this Has anyone else seen this and if so do you have a fix? thanks, allan Tail of build.log follows `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-adjustments.page help/C/edit-adjustments.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-crop.page help/C/edit-crop.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-enhance.page help/C/edit-enhance.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-external.page help/C/edit-external.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-nondestructive.page help/C/edit-nondestructive.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-redeye.page help/C/edit-redeye.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-rotate.page help/C/edit-rotate.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-straighten.page help/C/edit-straighten.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-time-date.page help/C/edit-time-date.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/edit-undo.page help/C/edit-undo.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/formats.page help/C/formats.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/import-camera.page help/C/import-camera.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/import-file.page help/C/import-file.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/import-f-spot.page help/C/import-f-spot.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/import-memorycard.page help/C/import-memorycard.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/index.page help/C/index.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-event.page help/C/organize-event.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-flag.page help/C/organize-flag.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-rating.page help/C/organize-rating.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-remove.page help/C/organize-remove.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-search.page help/C/organize-search.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-tag.page help/C/organize-tag.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/organize-title.page help/C/organize-title.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/other-files.page help/C/other-files.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/other-missing.page help/C/other-missing.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/other-multiple.page help/C/other-multiple.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/other-plugins.page help/C/other-plugins.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/raw.page help/C/raw.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/running.page help/C/running.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/share-background.page help/C/share-background.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/share-export.page help/C/share-export.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/share-print.page help/C/share-print.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/share-send.page help/C/share-send.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/share-slideshow.page help/C/share-slideshow.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/share-upload.page help/C/share-upload.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/view-displaying.page help/C/view-displaying.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/view-information.page help/C/view-information.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/el/el.po -o help/el/view-sidebar.page help/C/view-sidebar.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-adjustments.page help/C/edit-adjustments.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-crop.page help/C/edit-crop.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-enhance.page help/C/edit-enhance.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-external.page help/C/edit-external.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-nondestructive.page help/C/edit-nondestructive.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-redeye.page help/C/edit-redeye.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-rotate.page help/C/edit-rotate.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-straighten.page help/C/edit-straighten.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-time-date.page help/C/edit-time-date.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p help/es/es.po -o help/es/edit-undo.page help/C/edit-undo.page` `xml2po -m mallard -p
Re: [gentoo-user] Trouble updating shotwell
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:24 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: Two of my machines cannot update media-gfx/shotwell; the other two can update it. On the failing machines there are many lines in build.log saying /bin/sh: xml2po: command not found Do you have xml2po? It should be on /usr/bin/xml2po. The problem is probably related to the python-exec changes from the last months. Try to reemerge python-exec, and if it still fails, reemerge app-text/gnome-doc-utils (which xml2po is part of). Also, make sure eselect python list shows a valid Python interpreter as selected. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo's future directtion ?
Ah, I apologize. I did not mean to quote anything (it happens automatically; I will start paying more attention to it). I was hoping he would remember his additions to the conversation at hand and could extrapolate on them.
Re: [gentoo-user] Trouble updating shotwell
On Wed, Dec 03 2014, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 11:24 AM, gottl...@nyu.edu wrote: Two of my machines cannot update media-gfx/shotwell; the other two can update it. On the failing machines there are many lines in build.log saying /bin/sh: xml2po: command not found Do you have xml2po? It should be on /usr/bin/xml2po. The problem is probably related to the python-exec changes from the last months. Try to reemerge python-exec, and if it still fails, reemerge app-text/gnome-doc-utils (which xml2po is part of). Also, make sure eselect python list shows a valid Python interpreter as selected. Regards. reemerging app-text/gnome-doc-utils fixed it. On the bad machines the symlink for /usr/bin/xml2po was wrong. thanks, allan
Re: [gentoo-user] virus/malware scanner for linux
Am 02.12.2014 um 06:24 schrieb Joseph: I know there are some command line virus/malware scanners for Linux? It has been long time ago since I run any of them, that I forgot their names :-/ There's Maldet, Linux Malware Detect. https://www.rfxn.com/projects/linux-malware-detect/
[gentoo-user] installing Gentoo in a xen VM
Hi, I'd like to give Gentoo a try and want to install it in a xen VM. The server is otherwise running Debian. What would be the best way to do this? -- Again we must be afraid of speaking of daemons for fear that daemons might swallow us. Finally, this fear has become reasonable.
Re: [gentoo-user] installing Gentoo in a xen VM
Well, what's the problem? When i do this, then i just install debian, xen kernel, then create some config, download gentoo install cd, run it, and follow the handbook. 2014-12-04 6:14 GMT+05:00 lee l...@yagibdah.de: Hi, I'd like to give Gentoo a try and want to install it in a xen VM. The server is otherwise running Debian. What would be the best way to do this? -- Again we must be afraid of speaking of daemons for fear that daemons might swallow us. Finally, this fear has become reasonable.
Re: [gentoo-user] installing Gentoo in a xen VM
On 2014-12-04 02:14, lee wrote: Hi, I'd like to give Gentoo a try and want to install it in a xen VM. The server is otherwise running Debian. What would be the best way to do this? Either you can run a virtual machine using paravirtualization (PV) or full virtualization (HVM). If you want to use PV, then you create a partition for Gentoo, chroot, unpack stage3 and prepare your system for booting (follow the handbook). Then you create a configuration for your xen domU (Gentoo), provide a kernel and start it. You don't need the install-cd in this situation, nor any bootloader. If you prefer HVM, then you create a partition and use the install-cd to boot. After your install cd boots up, you partition your disk provided by xen dom0 (Debian), chroot, unpack stage3 and install the system along with the kernel and a bootloader. You can boot your Gentoo with pvgrub that will handle the booting to grub and it will load the kernel. This way, the Gentoo machine is like a black box for your Debian. I would recommend starting with HVM.
