Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Stephan Seitz stse+deb...@fsing.rootsland.net writes: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:18:27PM +0200, lee wrote: Who cares about the free driver before it's at least as good as the one from NVIDIA? Who cares about non-free software? Most people do, just look at all the windoze users. You can't even buy groceries without non-free software, and unless you have a rather old car, it won't work without non-free software so you won't even get to the store. They better appreciate these drivers. Without them, everyone who needs a GUI would not use Linux anymore. Well, I need a GUI, and I don’t use the non-free drivers for many years. And every feature works as well and the performance is at least as good? If you have enough time to help the maintainers, then help them. They don't want my help, they broke things intentionally. But I don’t think you will get much help from the kernel or Xorg people. They aren't the ones who removed 32bit support from Debian. -- Debian testing iad96 brokenarch -- 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/87hapkl01a@yun.yagibdah.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Lu, 22 oct 12, 22:11:11, Mark Allums wrote: Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. They disdain them, and pay no heed to bug reports filed against them. They also ignore kernel bug reports if the nvidia driver is loaded. They refer to that as tainting the kernel. In days past, you needed the nv driver, and now you need the nouveau driver. nvidia-glx or the nvidia blob are right out. You are putting all developers in just one pot, which is not accurate, to say the least. The Maintainers of the nvidia-graphics-drivers source package have the responsability to care about it, that is make it Debian Policy compliant, having it integrate properly in Debian, etc. What they can not do is care about bugs in the software itself, simply because they do not have access to the source. Don't forget that the Maintainers are doing this in their spare time and could step down whenever they want. Not getting an answer to bugs is more likely to be due to the usual problems: lack of time, the wheezy freeze, etc. On the other hand, maintainers of packages that the nvidia driver interacts with (the most obvious being Xorg and the Linux kernel, but there are others) have enough work as it is. Why should they care about bugs that appear *only* in combination with non-free software if the equivalent free software has no issues? 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: please put not all into multiarch!
Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com writes: there are others) have enough work as it is. Why should they care about bugs that appear *only* in combination with non-free software if the equivalent free software has no issues? Even *if* 32bit apps can be run with the free driver --- which I doubt very much --- getting something like 1--2 fps instead of only 10--20 doesn't really help much. It might be much easier if Debian would adjust so that the drivers provided by NVIDIA would integrate instead of trying to do it the other way round and messing it up in the process. Who cares about the free driver before it's at least as good as the one from NVIDIA? They better appreciate these drivers. Without them, everyone who needs a GUI would not use Linux anymore. -- Debian testing iad96 brokenarch -- 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/87y5ixmqz0@yun.yagibdah.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:18:27PM +0200, lee wrote: Who cares about the free driver before it's at least as good as the one from NVIDIA? Who cares about non-free software? They better appreciate these drivers. Without them, everyone who needs a GUI would not use Linux anymore. Well, I need a GUI, and I don’t use the non-free drivers for many years. If you have enough time to help the maintainers, then help them. But I don’t think you will get much help from the kernel or Xorg people. Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html | smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/23/2012 3:59 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Lu, 22 oct 12, 22:11:11, Mark Allums wrote: Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. They disdain them, and pay no heed to bug reports filed against them. They also ignore kernel bug reports if the nvidia driver is loaded. You are putting all developers in just one pot, which is not accurate, to say the least. Perhaps. That was not my intent. However, I believe it accurately describes the kernel group, for one. -- 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/5086e7fb.9000...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Mark Allums wrote: Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. They disdain them, and pay no heed to bug reports filed against them. They don't regard them as anathema. They regard them as Nvidia's problem. Which they are. I've used them in the past, and I certainly didn't expect the Debian kernel group to help me with them (and I certainly didn't get any help from Nvidia). They also ignore kernel bug reports if the nvidia driver is loaded. So does Linus, and for good reason. There is no way for anyone outside Nvidia to know what their closed-source drivers are doing. -- John Hasler -- 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/87zk3dkmv3@thumper.dhh.gt.org
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/23/2012 2:30 PM, John Hasler wrote: Mark Allums wrote: Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. They disdain them, and pay no heed to bug reports filed against them. They don't regard them as anathema. They regard them as Nvidia's problem. Which they are. I've used them in the past, and I certainly didn't expect the Debian kernel group to help me with them (and I certainly didn't get any help from Nvidia). They also ignore kernel bug reports if the nvidia driver is loaded. So does Linus, and for good reason. There is no way for anyone outside Nvidia to know what their closed-source drivers are doing. They certainly *do* regard them as anathema, as they do all closed-source and non-free software. Whether this fact is important or not is a separate discussion. I did not adequately include the closed-source nature into my point. I did not make myself clear. -- 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/5087088b.2060...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Mark Allums wrote: Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. I wrote: They don't regard them as anathema. They certainly *do* regard them as anathema, as they do all closed-source and non-free software. False. I am a Debian dev. I do not regard closed-source as anathema. I do consider it the sole responsibility of whoever controls the source. I am not going to help you fix it even if I can figure out how without source (unless you pay me) if I cannot publish the fixed version. Ask the guy you bought it from. He clearly wants to be the only one able to fix it. -- John Hasler -- 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/87vce0lv8r@thumper.dhh.gt.org
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/23/2012 4:43 PM, John Hasler wrote: Mark Allums wrote: Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. I wrote: They don't regard them as anathema. They certainly *do* regard them as anathema, as they do all closed-source and non-free software. False. I am a Debian dev. I do not regard closed-source as anathema. I do consider it the sole responsibility of whoever controls the source. I am not going to help you fix it even if I can figure out how without source (unless you pay me) if I cannot publish the fixed version. Ask the guy you bought it from. He clearly wants to be the only one able to fix it. Don't assume when I generalize that I am too stupid to realize that there might be exceptions. However, there are plenty of devs who do feel that way, enough to validly characterize one type of dev that way, a type that is not at all uncommon, and even typical. I would guess the number of such would be at least half based on what I see when I read lists, read IRC, read bug reports. They're everywhere. I am glad you are more moderate. How do you stand on device firmware? -- 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/50871953.5030...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Du, 21 oct 12, 17:33:17, Mark Allums wrote: Yes, because you have to enable multiarch before upgrading ia32-libs. This is documented in the wheezy Release Notes: http://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#ia32libs I did that. Multiarch in Wheezy, such as it is, is reasonably sane. As far as I can tell from p.d.o ia32-libs currently in Wheezy is NOT the one meant to be released. The one is sid probably is, as soon as all other dependencies are also ready. 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: please put not all into multiarch!
Claudius Hubig debian_1...@chubig.net writes: Hello lee, lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote: Claudius Hubig debian_1...@chubig.net writes: the advantage that not one big package has to be updated each time one of the libraries it contains changes, but only one small(-ish) library package. And which packages do I need to have installed to get 32bit support working again as it was before they broke it? Just telling users they must switch to brokenarch, leaving them screwed without 32bit support and saying we're not going to fix it because we don't want to update the packages anymore and will remove them is *not* an advantage. The packages your 32-bit application depends on. Simple as that :) Very funny :(( I didn't remove any packages and it stopped working. I have no way of knowing which packages I might need now. Apparently none of the 32bit apps that use SDL work anymore since they broke it, and the reasons for that are unknown. And because these packages are also 32-bit packages, your application can easily define which it needs and which it doesn’t need, rather than having to define a dependency on ia32-libs (and possibly other ia32-libs-* packages) of which it only needs a few libraries. I don't have any 32bit software from Debian packages. Everything I need from that is available in 64bit. The 32bit apps I have are not available in Debian and they worked fine, then the NVIDA drivers were updated and they don't work anymore since then. I sent a bug report weeks ago and it is being ignored. So again, what packages do I need to install now to get it working as it did before? The 32bit apps have not changed and still depend on the same things, whatever they are. Which x-server package(s) do you need to have installed to use the NVIDIA drivers from NVIDIAs website? Is there some documentation about how to switch back from the NVIDIA drivers that are in Debian? -- Debian testing iad96 brokenarch -- 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/87vce2bqqz@yun.yagibdah.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/22/2012 4:40 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 21 oct 12, 17:33:17, Mark Allums wrote: Yes, because you have to enable multiarch before upgrading ia32-libs. This is documented in the wheezy Release Notes: http://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#ia32libs I did that. Multiarch in Wheezy, such as it is, is reasonably sane. As far as I can tell from p.d.o ia32-libs currently in Wheezy is NOT the one meant to be released. The one is sid probably is, as soon as all other dependencies are also ready. Sigh. Well, it's done for me. I'm past it. Luckily for me, everything is working. Like I said before, I am I not needing to be concerned with this on my main machine. It's not yet 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/5086090f.3080...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/22/2012 8:06 AM, lee wrote: Claudius Hubig debian_1...@chubig.net writes: Hello lee, lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote: Claudius Hubig debian_1...@chubig.net writes: the advantage that not one big package has to be updated each time one of the libraries it contains changes, but only one small(-ish) library package. And which packages do I need to have installed to get 32bit support working again as it was before they broke it? Just telling users they must switch to brokenarch, leaving them screwed without 32bit support and saying we're not going to fix it because we don't want to update the packages anymore and will remove them is *not* an advantage. The packages your 32-bit application depends on. Simple as that :) Very funny :(( I didn't remove any packages and it stopped working. I have no way of knowing which packages I might need now. Apparently none of the 32bit apps that use SDL work anymore since they broke it, and the reasons for that are unknown. And because these packages are also 32-bit packages, your application can easily define which it needs and which it doesn’t need, rather than having to define a dependency on ia32-libs (and possibly other ia32-libs-* packages) of which it only needs a few libraries. I don't have any 32bit software from Debian packages. Everything I need from that is available in 64bit. The 32bit apps I have are not available in Debian and they worked fine, then the NVIDA drivers were updated and they don't work anymore since then. I sent a bug report weeks ago and it is being ignored. So again, what packages do I need to install now to get it working as it did before? The 32bit apps have not changed and still depend on the same things, whatever they are. Which x-server package(s) do you need to have installed to use the NVIDIA drivers from NVIDIAs website? Is there some documentation about how to switch back from the NVIDIA drivers that are in Debian? Debian devs regard the nvidia closed source drivers anathems. They disdain them, and pay no heed to bug reports filed against them. They also ignore kernel bug reports if the nvidia driver is loaded. They refer to that as tainting the kernel. In days past, you needed the nv driver, and now you need the nouveau driver. nvidia-glx or the nvidia blob are right out. You want the nouveau driver unless you are running lots of serious 3D stuff. -- 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/50860acf.80...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Sb, 20 oct 12, 12:02:02, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: But then, when I wanted to install the nvidia-glx package (32-bit), aptitude messed with several other packages. It wanted to deinstall skype (which is running perfectly in 64-bit environment), crrsim and some other 32-bit packages, due to unmet dependencies. Aptitude wants to deinstall those packages, or forces me, to install a lot of 32-bit libs, which I do not need! Why do you think so? The 64 bit skype is actually a 32 bit skype that needs ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk. In wheezy you need the regular libraries instead. 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: please put not all into multiarch!
2012/10/21 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com On Sb, 20 oct 12, 12:02:02, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: But then, when I wanted to install the nvidia-glx package (32-bit), aptitude messed with several other packages. It wanted to deinstall skype (which is running perfectly in 64-bit environment), crrsim and some other 32-bit packages, due to unmet dependencies. Aptitude wants to deinstall those packages, or forces me, to install a lot of 32-bit libs, which I do not need! Why do you think so? The 64 bit skype is actually a 32 bit skype that needs ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk. In wheezy you need the regular libraries instead. Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic I.e. I must install a bunch of i386-packages to meet skype-only dependencies? -- Best regards, Valery Mamonov.
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Du, 21 oct 12, 13:41:35, Valery Mamonov wrote: I.e. I must install a bunch of i386-packages to meet skype-only dependencies? Yes. Are you worried about the number of packages or size? If the later you should check the size of ia32-libs(-gtk) ;) 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: please put not all into multiarch!
2012/10/21 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com On Du, 21 oct 12, 13:41:35, Valery Mamonov wrote: I.e. I must install a bunch of i386-packages to meet skype-only dependencies? Yes. Are you worried about the number of packages or size? If the later you should check the size of ia32-libs(-gtk) ;) Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic About number of packages, of course - install almost 32bit-operating system to run only one program. I think, it's a problem of skype itself, too. -- Best regards, Valery Mamonov.
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Du, 21 oct 12, 14:00:36, Valery Mamonov wrote: 2012/10/21 Andrei POPESCU andreimpope...@gmail.com On Du, 21 oct 12, 13:41:35, Valery Mamonov wrote: I.e. I must install a bunch of i386-packages to meet skype-only dependencies? Yes. Are you worried about the number of packages or size? If the later you should check the size of ia32-libs(-gtk) ;) About number of packages, of course - install almost 32bit-operating system to run only one program. I think, it's a problem of skype itself, too. What I'm trying to say is that ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk probably contain all of those libraries. If you want to keep your system light you should probably install the real 32-bit skype (not the pseudo-amd64 one), because that package will depend only on the 32-bit libraries it really needs. 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: please put not all into multiarch!
Hello Valery, Valery Mamonov valerymamo...@gmail.com wrote: About number of packages, of course - install almost 32bit-operating system to run only one program. I think, it's a problem of skype itself, too. It is the problem of running a 32 bit application on a normally 64 bit operating system. Of course you need all the libraries - this has merely been hidden by the fact that previously, they were composed into a few large packages: 0 11:11 0 ares: ~ # apt-cache show ia32-libs | grep Installed-Size Installed-Size: 80838 0 11:11 0 ares: ~ # apt-cache show ia32-libs-gtk | grep Installed-Size Installed-Size: 34244 whereas now, you just install the ‘normal’ 32 bit libraries. This has the advantage that not one big package has to be updated each time one of the libraries it contains changes, but only one small(-ish) library package. Best regards, Claudius -- 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/2012102935.7ccb8...@ares.home.chubig.net
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
What I'm trying to say is that ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk probably contain all of those libraries. If you want to keep your system light you should probably install the real 32-bit skype (not the pseudo-amd64 one), because that package will depend only on the 32-bit libraries it really needs. Kind regards, Andrei Hi all! What I do not understand: Why does skype want to install lots of new 32-bit libs, when the package (and this is the 32-bit one) already can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk (which are also used by other applications). I suggest this solution: Packages should be built in that way, that they can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk or the libs from multiarch:i386. If that is working, then step by step ia32-libs may be made thinned out from double libs, until ia32-libs are no more necessary at all. At that point the package ia32-libs can be deleted. On the other hand, it should be made sure, that 32-bit applications should be able to use 64-bit libs as much as possible. 32-bit is dying! And in the next years, it will not be used any more. Greets Hans -- 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/201210211300.00605.hans.ullr...@loop.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 2012-10-21 13:00:00 +0200, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: What I do not understand: Why does skype want to install lots of new 32-bit libs, when the package (and this is the 32-bit one) already can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk (which are also used by other applications). Are you sure that it can (now and in the future), for *all* versions of the libs? I suggest this solution: Packages should be built in that way, that they can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk or the libs from multiarch:i386. If I understand correctly, one of the goals of multiarch is to replace packages like ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk, i.e. these packages will disappear in the future. So, the only correct solution is to depend on i386 packages. If that is working, then step by step ia32-libs may be made thinned out from double libs, until ia32-libs are no more necessary at all. At that point the package ia32-libs can be deleted. I think that this won't work due to possibly different library versions in ia32-libs and in i386, or you may get obscure crashes. -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- 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/20121021124133.gb5...@xvii.vinc17.org
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Hello Hans-J., Hans-J. Ullrich hans.ullr...@loop.de wrote: What I do not understand: Why does skype want to install lots of new 32-bit libs, when the package (and this is the 32-bit one) already can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk (which are also used by other applications). There is such a Skype package, it is called the amd64 version (from dpkg’s point of view). However, this package contains 32 bit code and therefore relies on ia32-libs etc. I suggest this solution: Packages should be built in that way, that they can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk or the libs from multiarch:i386. There are simply two different versions of Skype there: - Skype 32 bit uses multiarch:i386 - Skype 64 bit uses ia32-libs* On the other hand, it should be made sure, that 32-bit applications should be able to use 64-bit libs as much as possible. 32-bit is dying! And in the next years, it will not be used any more. 32-bit applications can and will never use 64-bit libs. Best, Claudius -- 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/20121021140808.68e3f...@ares.home.chubig.net
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Du, 21 oct 12, 13:00:00, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: What I do not understand: Why does skype want to install lots of new 32-bit libs, when the package (and this is the 32-bit one) already can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk (which are also used by other applications). Could you please provide copy-paste of the output and also the output of 'apt-cache policy skype' (or the full filename if you just downloaded it). 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: please put not all into multiarch!
Could you please provide copy-paste of the output and also the output of 'apt-cache policy skype' (or the full filename if you just downloaded it). Kind regards, Andrei Yes, i would kindly like to. Here is the output: apt-cache policy skype skype: Installiert: (keine) Installationskandidat: (keine) Versionstabelle: You should know, that I have installed an older version of 32-bit skype, as the latest amd64 version is not running very well. My version is skype-debian_2.2.0.25-1_i386.deb, which I installed by using '-- force-architecture-i386'. This version is running very well! I know, the latest version is 4.0.0.1, but as just to confirm: The 2.2. version is running in a pure amd64-environment very well! And as soon, as I added multiarch, this one wants to uninstall. However, as I already told before: I got a solution for this problem for myself: Just installed the nvidia driver from the nvidia site and evrything worked perfectly for me again. Although, I think, other people might have more problems. Best regards Hans -- 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/201210211706.18666.hans.ullr...@loop.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Claudius Hubig debian_1...@chubig.net writes: the advantage that not one big package has to be updated each time one of the libraries it contains changes, but only one small(-ish) library package. And which packages do I need to have installed to get 32bit support working again as it was before they broke it? Just telling users they must switch to brokenarch, leaving them screwed without 32bit support and saying we're not going to fix it because we don't want to update the packages anymore and will remove them is *not* an advantage. -- Debian testing iad96 brokenarch -- 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/878vazdfun@yun.yagibdah.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/21/2012 9:08 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 21 oct 12, 13:00:00, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: What I do not understand: Why does skype want to install lots of new 32-bit libs, when the package (and this is the 32-bit one) already can use either ia32-libs and ia32-libs-gtk (which are also used by other applications). Could you please provide copy-paste of the output and also the output of 'apt-cache policy skype' (or the full filename if you just downloaded it). What some of you are missing is that the transitional package ia32-libs in sid is uninstallable unless you allow experimental, because of some of the dependencies. It's just not a viable option unless you are a dev working on those packages. -- 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/50842259.7040...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Hello lee, lee l...@yun.yagibdah.de wrote: Claudius Hubig debian_1...@chubig.net writes: the advantage that not one big package has to be updated each time one of the libraries it contains changes, but only one small(-ish) library package. And which packages do I need to have installed to get 32bit support working again as it was before they broke it? Just telling users they must switch to brokenarch, leaving them screwed without 32bit support and saying we're not going to fix it because we don't want to update the packages anymore and will remove them is *not* an advantage. The packages your 32-bit application depends on. Simple as that :) And because these packages are also 32-bit packages, your application can easily define which it needs and which it doesn’t need, rather than having to define a dependency on ia32-libs (and possibly other ia32-libs-* packages) of which it only needs a few libraries. Best, Claudius -- 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/20121021183358.3b45f...@ares.home.chubig.net
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Hello Mark, Mark Allums m...@allums.com wrote: What some of you are missing is that the transitional package ia32-libs in sid is uninstallable unless you allow experimental, because of some of the dependencies. It's just not a viable option unless you are a dev working on those packages. And why exactly would you want to install ia32-libs on a multi-arch system? No package from the 32-bit archive (i.e. those working with multi-arch) will depend on it. Best, Claudius -- 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/20121021183546.5d093...@ares.home.chubig.net
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Du, 21 oct 12, 11:27:05, Mark Allums wrote: What some of you are missing is that the transitional package ia32-libs in sid is uninstallable unless you allow experimental, because of some of the dependencies. It's just not a viable option unless you are a dev working on those packages. But the transitional package are not needed, they will just pull the 32-bit version of the libraries, which one can also install by hand. If a package specifically depends on them equivs can help. 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: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/21/2012 12:35 PM, Claudius Hubig wrote: Hello Mark, Mark Allums m...@allums.com wrote: What some of you are missing is that the transitional package ia32-libs in sid is uninstallable unless you allow experimental, because of some of the dependencies. It's just not a viable option unless you are a dev working on those packages. And why exactly would you want to install ia32-libs on a multi-arch system? No package from the 32-bit archive (i.e. those working with multi-arch) will depend on it. Best, Claudius It is already installed. This is the update. This is a transitional package to move from it to the individual packages. The thing is, people are complaining about trying to install it. You need to ask *them* why they want it. However, there are still packages that depend on it. Therefore, you need it if you have one of those packages. The Joker in the deck is that it has screwed up dependencies itself, and it really should not be in sid. If your system has a lot of packages installed, like mine, you have to enable experimental, then install it. (When I naively install the transitional update, I got about thirty *:i386 libraries and about a dozen packages from experimental upgraded or installed. I am very nervous about it. I have put a freeze on installing further updates or new packages except security packages until after the final release of Wheezy and until progress is made on cleaning up the mess and so forth. If this were my only or main machine, I never would have taken it out of wheezy, and this wouldn't even 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/50845ad1.1020...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/21/2012 12:48 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 21 oct 12, 11:27:05, Mark Allums wrote: What some of you are missing is that the transitional package ia32-libs in sid is uninstallable unless you allow experimental, because of some of the dependencies. It's just not a viable option unless you are a dev working on those packages. But the transitional package are not needed, they will just pull the 32-bit version of the libraries, which one can also install by hand. If a package specifically depends on them equivs can help. That's the problem, alright. Some packages still depend on it. I don't think that transitional package should be in sid, or even exist. -- 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/50845b3f.9030...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/21/2012 3:28 PM, Mark Allums wrote: On 10/21/2012 12:35 PM, Claudius Hubig wrote: Hello Mark, Mark Allums m...@allums.com wrote: What some of you are missing is that the transitional package ia32-libs in sid is uninstallable unless you allow experimental, because of some of the dependencies. It's just not a viable option unless you are a dev working on those packages. And why exactly would you want to install ia32-libs on a multi-arch system? No package from the 32-bit archive (i.e. those working with multi-arch) will depend on it. Best, Claudius It is already installed. This is the update. This is a transitional package to move from it to the individual packages. The thing is, people are complaining about trying to install it. You need to ask *them* why they want it. However, there are still packages that depend on it. Therefore, you need it if you have one of those packages. The Joker in the deck is that it has screwed up dependencies itself, and it really should not be in sid. If your system has a lot of packages installed, like mine, you have to enable experimental, then install it. (When I naively install the transitional update, I got about thirty *:i386 libraries and about a dozen packages from experimental upgraded or installed. I am very nervous about it. I have put a freeze on installing further updates or new packages except security packages until after the final release of Wheezy and until progress is made on cleaning up the mess and so forth. If this were my only or main machine, I never would have taken it out of wheezy, and this wouldn't even be an issue.) That should read something like, I got all these i386 packages from sid, plus all these other packages from exp. -- 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/50845f2a.8090...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Hello Mark, Mark Allums m...@allums.com wrote: However, there are still packages that depend on it. Therefore, you need it if you have one of those packages. Which packages? The Joker in the deck is that it has screwed up dependencies itself, and it really should not be in sid. Sid, by definition, is broken. If your system has a lot of packages installed, like mine, you have to enable experimental, then install it. I have to admit I did not look into that any further, but, yes, the dependencies are rather screwed up: ia32-libs:amd64 depends on ia32-libs-i386, which is only available in the i386 architecture (and then able to pull in other i386 packages). (When I naively install the transitional update, I got about thirty *:i386 libraries and about a dozen packages from experimental upgraded or installed. I am very nervous about it. ia32-libs (the old amd64 package) contains many, many i386 libraries - in order to get _all_ of them, it has to depend on all these i386 libraries, which in turn means that they all have to be multi-archified - this takes some time. Best, Claudius -- 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/20121021214245.00c44...@ares.home.chubig.net
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Du, 21 oct 12, 21:42:45, Claudius Hubig wrote: I have to admit I did not look into that any further, but, yes, the dependencies are rather screwed up: ia32-libs:amd64 depends on ia32-libs-i386, which is only available in the i386 architecture (and then able to pull in other i386 packages). Yes, because you have to enable multiarch before upgrading ia32-libs. This is documented in the wheezy Release Notes: http://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#ia32libs 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: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/21/2012 5:00 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote: On Du, 21 oct 12, 21:42:45, Claudius Hubig wrote: I have to admit I did not look into that any further, but, yes, the dependencies are rather screwed up: ia32-libs:amd64 depends on ia32-libs-i386, which is only available in the i386 architecture (and then able to pull in other i386 packages). Yes, because you have to enable multiarch before upgrading ia32-libs. This is documented in the wheezy Release Notes: http://www.debian.org/releases/wheezy/amd64/release-notes/ch-upgrading.en.html#ia32libs I did that. Multiarch in Wheezy, such as it is, is reasonably sane. In sid, the dependency tree has some impossibilities. They have been taken care of, primitively, for devs working on multiarch, but you can't get there from here if you want to do it on a Wheezy system with a small selection of sid packages, if any of those package are in multiarch and are i386 packages. Specifically, sid's wine-bin:i386 could not be installed without updating ia32-libs, which cannot happen ordinarily. However, if you set synaptic (for instance) to prefer experimental, ia32-libs is now installable, but (on this particular system of mine) it pulled in about a dozen experimental packages and was uninstallable without them. I let it happen, and everything seems to work now, especially wine, but it will be some months before the devs priority will shift in earnest from releasing Wheezy to working on Jessy and making multiarch a desirable thing. I am over the hump, now, and all I have to do now is practice patience, but for newbies this thing will be traumatic if they go through it now. I recommend based on my own experiences not to tackle this now unless absolutely necessary, and to be patient, because I am sure that, in the fullness of time, a smoother transition will be worked out, and it really isn't necessary for most people. -- 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/5084782d@allums.com
please put not all into multiarch!
Dear package-teams, please do not put everything to multiarch! Just let me explain, why I think so. As already reported here, many users (and me too) got into a lot of problems, beccause the 32-bit nvidia drivers are now put into multiarch. Doing so, several applications, like googleeearth, X-plane and some other 32- bit stuff, which worked PERFECTLY before, did not run any more. So I decided, to change to multiarch. Quickly added i386 (dpkg --add- architecture i386) to my system and did an aptitude update. But then, when I wanted to install the nvidia-glx package (32-bit), aptitude messed with several other packages. It wanted to deinstall skype (which is running perfectly in 64-bit environment), crrsim and some other 32-bit packages, due to unmet dependencies. Aptitude wants to deinstall those packages, or forces me, to install a lot of 32-bit libs, which I do not need! Hmm, as all these apps were working before in amd64 environment, I see no sense , why to crap my system with a bunch of libs, which I am not needing (as the apps are already running). As I said: I just need to install a single package from i386, and do not want to change my whole system! Just understand, I do not want to mourne against the idea of multiarch, but I think, you should not put every 32-bit thingies into i386. Some packages should be made directly installable from amd64, there are coming driver into my mind as well as some decent packages (i.e. wine stuff). For those with the same problem: My workaround for now is just to deinstall every nvidia package and use the installer from the nvidia site. This let me install 64-bit and 32-bit driver, and googleearth is happily running again. Best regards Hans -- 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/201210201202.03141.hans.ullr...@loop.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:02:02PM +0200, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: Dear package-teams, please do not put everything to multiarch! Just let me explain, why I think so. As already reported here, many users (and me too) got into a lot of problems, beccause the 32-bit nvidia drivers are now put into multiarch. Shouldn't you file a bug against the offending nvidia packages? -- If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. --- Malcolm X -- 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/20121020133551.GD13784@tal
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/20/2012 5:02 AM, Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: Dear package-teams, please do not put everything to multiarch! Just let me explain, why I think so. As already reported here, many users (and me too) got into a lot of problems, beccause the 32-bit nvidia drivers are now put into multiarch. Doing so, several applications, like googleeearth, X-plane and some other 32- bit stuff, which worked PERFECTLY before, did not run any more. So I decided, to change to multiarch. Quickly added i386 (dpkg --add- architecture i386) to my system and did an aptitude update. But then, when I wanted to install the nvidia-glx package (32-bit), aptitude messed with several other packages. It wanted to deinstall skype (which is running perfectly in 64-bit environment), crrsim and some other 32-bit packages, due to unmet dependencies. Aptitude wants to deinstall those packages, or forces me, to install a lot of 32-bit libs, which I do not need! Hmm, as all these apps were working before in amd64 environment, I see no sense , why to crap my system with a bunch of libs, which I am not needing (as the apps are already running). As I said: I just need to install a single package from i386, and do not want to change my whole system! Just understand, I do not want to mourne against the idea of multiarch, but I think, you should not put every 32-bit thingies into i386. Some packages should be made directly installable from amd64, there are coming driver into my mind as well as some decent packages (i.e. wine stuff). For those with the same problem: My workaround for now is just to deinstall every nvidia package and use the installer from the nvidia site. This let me install 64-bit and 32-bit driver, and googleearth is happily running again. Best regards Hans Hans, the state of multiarch, post-Wheezy, is that it is not ready for use. As you have found, it is not compatible with everything, or perhaps it should be put the other way: Not everything may be compatible with it. People are advised to be patient about updating/upgrading, especially when running non-Debian software. In the fullness of time, it will all Just Work (tm). Allegedly. -- 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/5082b349.1030...@allums.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Hans, the state of multiarch, post-Wheezy, is that it is not ready for use. As you have found, it is not compatible with everything, or perhaps it should be put the other way: Not everything may be compatible with it. People are advised to be patient about updating/upgrading, especially when running non-Debian software. In the fullness of time, it will all Just Work (tm). Allegedly. Mark, I know, that this multiarch is still on the way to working, However, I see great power in it. But at the moment, I think, it is no good idea, to put essential packages into multiarch. Instead they should put those packages step-by-step into it. My mail aimed to show, what problems appear at the moment. So others (and first of all the developers) can see, what trouble appears. Chris: There is no need, to file a bugreport, as a) it is wanted, to split 64- bit and 32-bit of nvidia packages and b) it is already recognized in the list what problems appear. Best regards Hans -- 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/201210201713.00261.hans.ullr...@loop.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On Saturday 20 October 2012 16:12:59 Hans-J. Ullrich wrote: Hans, the state of multiarch, post-Wheezy, is that it is not ready for use. As you have found, it is not compatible with everything, or perhaps it should be put the other way: Not everything may be compatible with it. People are advised to be patient about updating/upgrading, especially when running non-Debian software. In the fullness of time, it will all Just Work (tm). Allegedly. Mark, I know, that this multiarch is still on the way to working, However, I see great power in it. But at the moment, I think, it is no good idea, to put essential packages into multiarch. Instead they should put those packages step-by-step into it. My mail aimed to show, what problems appear at the moment. So others (and first of all the developers) can see, what trouble appears. No, you cannot assume that the developers read the list. Many of them don't. This is the _users_ list. Chris: There is no need, to file a bugreport, as a) it is wanted, to split 64- bit and 32-bit of nvidia packages and b) it is already recognized in the list what problems appear. Yes, but the list is the wrong place to report it. If you want the developers to take any notice, you have to file a bug report. A bug report can, I believe, be a request for something that is not there. You can complain all you like, the users can't do anything. And the fact that you think something is obviously needed, does not mean that the developers will necessarily agree with you. Lisi -- 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/201210201746.41374.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
Lisi writes: A bug report can, I believe, be a request for something that is not there. Yes. It's called a wishlist bug and it is one of the choices offered by reportbug. -- John Hasler -- 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/871ugtoz1f@thumper.dhh.gt.org
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com writes: Lisi writes: A bug report can, I believe, be a request for something that is not there. Yes. It's called a wishlist bug and it is one of the choices offered by reportbug. I have already sent a bug report, and it is being ignored. So it really does work to use the driver from NVIDIAs website? What else do you need to have installed for it to work? If it does, I will go back that. -- Debian testing iad96 brokenarch -- 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/87hapod9jr@yun.yagibdah.de
Re: please put not all into multiarch!
On 10/20/2012 6:10 PM, lee wrote: John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com writes: Lisi writes: A bug report can, I believe, be a request for something that is not there. Yes. It's called a wishlist bug and it is one of the choices offered by reportbug. I have already sent a bug report, and it is being ignored. So it really does work to use the driver from NVIDIAs website? What else do you need to have installed for it to work? If it does, I will go back that. You need to be able to build kernel modules, e.g. m-a, build-essential, the version of gcc that matches the version used to compile the kernel, kernel headers, dkms, that sort of thing, etc. The nvidia blob for 64-bit comes with a 32-bit compatibility library, and the installer will ask you if you want to install those as well (it's optional). You have to recompile the kernel modules every time the kernel is updated, if that changes the ABI, which is not unusual at all. (This is true of the Non-free glx package as well.) -- 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/508337d7.2010...@allums.com
