Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tuesday 06 September 2011 23:53:16 Neil Bothwick wrote: Ninety-Ninety Rule Of Project Schedules - The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent of the time. Where I worked we used to say the first 50% of the project takes the first 90% of the time, and the other50% of the project takes the other 90% of the time. -- Rgds Peter Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:55:08 +0100 Peter Humphrey pe...@humphrey.ukfsn.org wrote: On Tuesday 06 September 2011 23:53:16 Neil Bothwick wrote: Ninety-Ninety Rule Of Project Schedules - The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent of the time. Where I worked we used to say the first 50% of the project takes the first 90% of the time, and the other50% of the project takes the other 90% of the time. Our rule of thumb for estimated schedules is to get the worst possible estimate for how long it will take. Then multiply by pi -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Sunday 11 September 2011 14:06:58 Alan McKinnon wrote: Our rule of thumb for estimated schedules is to get the worst possible estimate for how long it will take. Then multiply by pi On one large project (200 man-years) we found the factor was 2.3. But by the time we had enough data to calculate it, the project was so far behind that it got cancelled. -- Rgds Peter Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:06:58 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Our rule of thumb for estimated schedules is to get the worst possible estimate for how long it will take. Then multiply by pi To how many places? -- Neil Bothwick It's not who you know; it's whom you know. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:17:20 +0100 Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 15:06:58 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: Our rule of thumb for estimated schedules is to get the worst possible estimate for how long it will take. Then multiply by pi To how many places? As many as fit in your calculator (special answer just to confuse the project managers) :-) -- Alan McKinnnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-09-05, Alex Schusterwo...@wonkology.org wrote: Graham Murray wonders: Has the libreoffice ebuild suddenly developed stability problems? Today is the 4th time in five days that my daily ~x86 emerge uD world has rebuilt libreoffice. On 1st Sept it was because of a use flag change, then the next day a new version was put in the tree, then there was an -r1 release and today there is yet another use flag change. Same here on ~amd64. The last change is that cups is mandatory now, What?? So if I don't have a printer, and have no intention of printing anything from this system, libreoffice requires that I install Cups? Sounds like it's time to switch back to OOo. OOo is no longer in the tree so you'll have to do it the manual way. I like how that was done tho. Now you're stuck with this new thing that requires something some don't want. sighs Oh, there is the binary one tho. I wonder if it has cups turned on too? lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-05, Alex Schuster wo...@wonkology.org wrote: Graham Murray wonders: Has the libreoffice ebuild suddenly developed stability problems? Today is the 4th time in five days that my daily ~x86 emerge uD world has rebuilt libreoffice. On 1st Sept it was because of a use flag change, then the next day a new version was put in the tree, then there was an -r1 release and today there is yet another use flag change. Same here on ~amd64. The last change is that cups is mandatory now, What?? So if I don't have a printer, and have no intention of printing anything from this system, libreoffice requires that I install Cups? In my puny laptop, CUPS takes 1 min to compile, the source code is 4.4 Mb and the installed binaries are 9.3 Mb. It seems to be updated at the rate of once a month, roughly. I have never configured CUPS, *ever*, and it always just works when I connect to a new network. The printers just appear in the print dialog, and it always works. It always remembers my last selected options. To me it seems a rather sane default to always require the most used printing system in an office suite. Sounds like it's time to switch back to OOo. It would not surprise me that they will switch to mandatory CUPS in the future. It just happened before in LO because they develop new features faster, I believe. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On 2011-09-06, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:25:22 +0100, Stroller wrote: Isn't CUPS really bug and bloaty and horrible? It's definitely huge. It does however seem to work pretty well. It has it's own web-interface, which one doesn't seem able to disable - why can't I just configure text files? You can, or at least you could the last time I tried it. You can, and in some cases you must. There are certain strings I _have_ to put in the config files by hand because the webUI chokes on them. The web interface only does anything if you load it into a browser. And then it doesn't always do the right thing. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! My vaseline is at RUNNING... gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-05, Alex Schusterwo...@wonkology.org wrote: Graham Murray wonders: Has the libreoffice ebuild suddenly developed stability problems? Today is the 4th time in five days that my daily ~x86 emerge uD world has rebuilt libreoffice. On 1st Sept it was because of a use flag change, then the next day a new version was put in the tree, then there was an -r1 release and today there is yet another use flag change. Same here on ~amd64. The last change is that cups is mandatory now, What?? So if I don't have a printer, and have no intention of printing anything from this system, libreoffice requires that I install Cups? In my puny laptop, CUPS takes 1 min to compile, the source code is 4.4 Mb and the installed binaries are 9.3 Mb. It seems to be updated at the rate of once a month, roughly. I have never configured CUPS, *ever*, and it always just works when I connect to a new network. The printers just appear in the print dialog, and it always works. It always remembers my last selected options. To me it seems a rather sane default to always require the most used printing system in an office suite. This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. That wasn't long ago either. I haven't had to do that the last few upgrades but for over a year, that was required. It used to get on my nerves. Restarting the service I can understand. It needs to reload its new config and all but not deleting and adding them again. Maybe you and I should add, YMMV. ;-) Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-06, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:25:22 +0100, Stroller wrote: Isn't CUPS really bug and bloaty and horrible? It's definitely huge. It does however seem to work pretty well. Maybe I'm just naïve, but how a daemon of 9.33 Mb it's now considered bloated? It takes 54 Mb of memory (virtual size, so it includes shared libraries), which is less than 5% in a 1 Gb RAM system (which is little by today standards). If you are planning on installing LibreOffice, I think the bloat of CUPS is negligible. Specially if, as I said, it usually just works. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-09-06, Neil Bothwickn...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:25:22 +0100, Stroller wrote: Isn't CUPS really bug and bloaty and horrible? It's definitely huge. It does however seem to work pretty well. Huge? root@fireball / # equery s cups * net-print/cups-1.5.0-r2 Total files : 482 Total size : 6.41 MiB root@fireball / # If that is considered huge, we have a new standard. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-05, Alex Schusterwo...@wonkology.org wrote: Graham Murray wonders: Has the libreoffice ebuild suddenly developed stability problems? Today is the 4th time in five days that my daily ~x86 emerge uD world has rebuilt libreoffice. On 1st Sept it was because of a use flag change, then the next day a new version was put in the tree, then there was an -r1 release and today there is yet another use flag change. Same here on ~amd64. The last change is that cups is mandatory now, What?? So if I don't have a printer, and have no intention of printing anything from this system, libreoffice requires that I install Cups? In my puny laptop, CUPS takes 1 min to compile, the source code is 4.4 Mb and the installed binaries are 9.3 Mb. It seems to be updated at the rate of once a month, roughly. I have never configured CUPS, *ever*, and it always just works when I connect to a new network. The printers just appear in the print dialog, and it always works. It always remembers my last selected options. To me it seems a rather sane default to always require the most used printing system in an office suite. This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. That wasn't long ago either. I haven't had to do that the last few upgrades but for over a year, that was required. It used to get on my nerves. Restarting the service I can understand. It needs to reload its new config and all but not deleting and adding them again. Maybe you and I should add, YMMV. ;-) I think that goes without saying: every one can only speak about personal experience. But the thing is, CUPS is basically owned by Apple. And I'm pretty sure the CUPS Gentoo installs is basically the same that Apple installs in their machines (the patches Gentoo applies are few and don't change the source that much). I don't like Apple, and I don't own nor use any of their products. But I have to admit they usually just works. And (in my experience, YMMV, etc.), it's the same in my Gentoo boxen. I'm in my last PhD tour, and I have connected my laptop (and printed) in like 4 or 5 different networks of universities literally all over the world in the last few boxes. And I just Ctrl-P, select printer, and click on print. From that point of view (mine), making CUPS mandatory for LibreOffice (which this thread is all about) seems like the reasonable thing to do. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. Paul, I suspect you've got a udev configuration problem. Your printer *should* get some kind of persistent symlink pointing to its device node, probably derived from its serial number. If that isn't working properly, fixing it should fix your recurring CUPS issues. If udev is behaving properly, then perhaps CUPS is latching on to something more transient. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:57:06AM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: In my puny laptop, CUPS takes 1 min to compile, the source code is 4.4 Mb and the installed binaries are 9.3 Mb. It seems to be updated at the rate of once a month, roughly. I have never configured CUPS, *ever*, and it always just works when I connect to a new network. The printers just appear in the print dialog, and it always works. It always remembers my last selected options. To me it seems a rather sane default to always require the most used printing system in an office suite. Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised interfaces, protocols and formats? At one time, Sendmail was the most used mail server. Does anybody still use it? For that matter why shouldn't we all be required to use the most used operating system? Seems we have a case of embrace and extend working here. No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly augmented by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always having a fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. Even me. ;-) Do you know a decent office suite which runs under G/L? Looks like I'll be needing one soon. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Hi, Paul. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:28:16AM -0500, Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. I also print infrequently. I turn my printer on, and it simply works, straight away (after warming up; it's a laser printer). However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 11:28:16 schrieb Paul Hartman: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. Sounds familiar. I solved this by removing the usb-USE for cups. Since then it works without any problems. I own a HP-Printer, FWIW. Regards, Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 16:01:10 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote about [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?: On 2011-09-06, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:25:22 +0100, Stroller wrote: Isn't CUPS really bug and bloaty and horrible? It's definitely huge. Compared to LibreOffice?? ROFLMAO! -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* dwn...@ntlworld.com (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Paul. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:28:16AM -0500, Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. I also print infrequently. I turn my printer on, and it simply works, straight away (after warming up; it's a laser printer). However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Is there a simple IPP daemon which could wrap lprng? -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 16:43:39 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised interfaces, protocols and formats? How about IPP? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol Oh wait... that's what cups is using. No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly augmented by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always having a fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. Even me. ;-) How about the lpr command provided by cups? Does it not work for you? Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:03:19PM +0200, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote: Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 16:43:39 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised interfaces, protocols and formats? How about IPP? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol Oh wait... that's what cups is using. Ah yes, a standard. So we have the choice between all the IPP implementations. That's cups and, ... err - is there another one? But why should I have to use an over the top bloated Internet protocol? I've got one single printer on the end of a USB cable. I want a simple spooler, as simple as possible and not simpler. No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly augmented by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always having a fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. Even me. ;-) How about the lpr command provided by cups? Does it not work for you? I believe it did work for me for the short time I had cups installed. More pertinent is, why won't the lpr command work for LibreOffice? Michael -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 01:02:59PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Paul. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:28:16AM -0500, Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. I also print infrequently. I turn my printer on, and it simply works, straight away (after warming up; it's a laser printer). However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. Is there a simple IPP daemon which could wrap lprng? Adding a layer of complexity to a daemon to cope with added complexity in a client program? I doubt it. It sounds like madness. -- :wq -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:03:19PM +0200, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote: Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 16:43:39 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised interfaces, protocols and formats? How about IPP? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol Oh wait... that's what cups is using. Ah yes, a standard. So we have the choice between all the IPP implementations. That's cups and, ... err - is there another one? The point is that it is a standard, not a proprietary protocol. The proof is that it works on every operating system. But why should I have to use an over the top bloated Internet protocol? I've got one single printer on the end of a USB cable. I want a simple spooler, as simple as possible and not simpler. Nobody is forcing you to anything: but upstream projects (like LibreOffice) need to fulfill the needs of all their users... not only you. Don't force *them* to support every single printing system in the planet earth; it's Open Source, if it's so important to you, write the lpr support for LibreOffice. No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly augmented by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always having a fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. Even me. ;-) How about the lpr command provided by cups? Does it not work for you? I believe it did work for me for the short time I had cups installed. More pertinent is, why won't the lpr command work for LibreOffice? Because the Open Source community has limited resources. The LibreOffice devs (or maybe the Gentoo ones) choose to support CUPS and only CUPS, because it takes care of the most cases, not only yours. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 01:02:59PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Paul. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:28:16AM -0500, Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. I also print infrequently. I turn my printer on, and it simply works, straight away (after warming up; it's a laser printer). However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. Because, as simple as it could be, it's another one. Big projects need to support CUPS, because they need to work for everyone (or as many as possible). It makes no sense *at all* to support more printing systems. And again, it's Open Source. If there is enough demand, someone will write support for other printing systems. Just don't assume that any project (being LibreOffice or Gentoo) need to support your choices besides the most used one. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 01:02:59PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. IPP is just becoming indicates a change. Where's change coming from? Demand to satisfy new users. Who are the new users? Probably the people running turnkey installs of Ubuntu. For me, IPP and CUPS have just worked beautifully*. Any SKU of Windows 7 higher than 'starter' will talk to a CUPS daemon just fine, and will automatically see a CUPS daemon running on the network if the daemon is using running mdns-sd. The one trouble I've had is getting those mdns-sd broadcasts forwarded across my subnets. Change happens. Is there a simple IPP daemon which could wrap lprng? Adding a layer of complexity to a daemon to cope with added complexity in a client program? I doubt it. It sounds like madness. Isn't that what inetd does? nc? Hell, isn't that what does one thing, and one thing only KISS philosophy behind unixy commands and piping philosophy has been about all along? Insert a shim or adapter between two things which are related, but not quite compatible? * And, yes, I realize that, for some, it doesn't. That's what mailing lists like this are helpful for...troubleshooting. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 17:48:49 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 07:03:19PM +0200, Michael Schreckenbauer wrote: Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 16:43:39 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Is that right? How about it being saner to conform to standardised interfaces, protocols and formats? How about IPP? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Printing_Protocol Oh wait... that's what cups is using. Ah yes, a standard. So we have the choice between all the IPP implementations. That's cups and, ... err - is there another one? Well, there's lprng-ipp. Not in portage though http://jointlab.upol.cz/~michale/projects/lprng-ipp/ For other OSes there are other implementations available. But why should I have to use an over the top bloated Internet protocol? I've got one single printer on the end of a USB cable. I want a simple spooler, as simple as possible and not simpler. No, the sane alternative is to use the `lpr' command, possibly augmented by special arguments for particular spoolers, but always having a fallback to standard `lpr'. That way, everybody's happy. Even me. ;-) How about the lpr command provided by cups? Does it not work for you? I believe it did work for me for the short time I had cups installed. More pertinent is, why won't the lpr command work for LibreOffice? Because LibreOffice uses ipp for printing. Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 17:55:54 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Hi, Michael. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 01:02:59PM -0400, Michael Mol wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Paul. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 11:28:16AM -0500, Paul Hartman wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. I also print infrequently. I turn my printer on, and it simply works, straight away (after warming up; it's a laser printer). However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. If it's no big deal, why don't you provide patches to LibreOffice? Is there a simple IPP daemon which could wrap lprng? Adding a layer of complexity to a daemon to cope with added complexity in a client program? I doubt it. It sounds like madness. lprng-ipp seems to implement that madness. Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Hi, Canek. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 02:22:44PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. Because, as simple as it could be, it's another one. Big projects need to support CUPS, because they need to work for everyone (or as many as possible). It makes no sense *at all* to support more printing systems. It enables more people to use it. The support for lpr exists. It's being removed, for some reason. Given that printing works by constructing a postscript equivalent of the thing being printed, just how difficult can it be to squirt this postscript down lpr rather than the cups equivalent? How long does it take to write a C++ `if' statement? And again, it's Open Source. If there is enough demand, someone will write support for other printing systems. Just don't assume that any project (being LibreOffice or Gentoo) need to support your choices besides the most used one. Again the code already exists, it's merely a matter of not destroying it. I became a user based on it supporting a standard printing system, and it's perfectly reasonable for me to expect that support to continue. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am 06.09.2011 20:57, schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Again the code already exists, it's merely a matter of not destroying it. I became a user based on it supporting a standard printing system, and it's perfectly reasonable for me to expect that support to continue. Is this list really the right place to discuss this? Would not the gentoo-dev list or gentoo bugzilla be better? Assumed that it is gentoo who makes cups now mandatory and not upstream. If it is gentoo then why not just patch the ebuilds in your local overlay and be happy. If it is upstream then all your complains would be better adressed upstream. Maybe they have a bunch of really good reasons to do as they did, reasons nobody HERE knows about. Greetings Sebastian Beßler signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On 2011-09-06 19:48, Alan Mackenzie wrote: I believe it did work for me for the short time I had cups installed. More pertinent is, why won't the lpr command work for LibreOffice? Hm... Can you not try to print to file (postscript, pdf) and then use lpr (which will filter it through ghostscript) to print? Yes, it's an extra step but going through the extra steps of finding a new office suite that fits you and your needs may not be worth it. Besides, you can always print extra copies, do fine tuning of the printing (like printing duplex, two pages or more on the same page etc.) this way. I do agree with you that CUPS is perhaps a bit convoluted, difficult to understand (when it comes to configuration) etc. When it (CUPS) feels like not playing, then there can be quite a few hours of frustration and cursing before getting it to work... but it works for me, currently;I have a very nice duplex laser printer from Kyocera with Linux support out of the box which helps... :-) Best regards Peter K
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 18:57:25 schrieb Alan Mackenzie: Hi, Canek. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 02:22:44PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. Because, as simple as it could be, it's another one. Big projects need to support CUPS, because they need to work for everyone (or as many as possible). It makes no sense *at all* to support more printing systems. It enables more people to use it. Yes. that's you and...? All binary distros use cups for printing. I would think, most gentoo users do the same. The BSDs, I know of, use cups. MacOS uses it. It works for Windows- Clients. There are IPP-Servers for Windows. What was your argument again? The support for lpr exists. It's being removed, for some reason. Given that printing works by constructing a postscript equivalent of the thing being printed, just how difficult can it be to squirt this postscript down lpr rather than the cups equivalent? How long does it take to write a C++ `if' statement? I get it. You have no idea how software development at such a large scale works. And again, it's Open Source. If there is enough demand, someone will write support for other printing systems. Just don't assume that any project (being LibreOffice or Gentoo) need to support your choices besides the most used one. Again the code already exists, it's merely a matter of not destroying it. This code needs to be supported and maintained for literally no good reason. If you think, that's no work at all, just volunteer for the task. I became a user based on it supporting a standard printing system, and it's perfectly reasonable for me to expect that support to continue. No, it's not, unless you are willing to do the additional work. Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Canek. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 02:22:44PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: The support for lpr exists. It's being removed, for some reason. Given that printing works by constructing a postscript equivalent of the thing being printed, just how difficult can it be to squirt this postscript down lpr rather than the cups equivalent? How long does it take to write a C++ `if' statement? You don't actually code in large projects, do you? That single 'if' statement is going to multiply your needed testing coverage area by a very large amount. Even automated tests can be enough of a pain that PHP just had a massive security problem by being sloppy and not _running_ them prior to a point release. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: This is rather odd. For the longest, every time I had a cups update, I had to delete my printers then add them back again. It would not print until I did so. I have to do that every time I plug my printer in... I print so infrequently, every time I want to print I turn the printer on and plug it into my PC, and then spend 25 minutes trying to make it work with CUPS again. Paul, I suspect you've got a udev configuration problem. Your printer *should* get some kind of persistent symlink pointing to its device node, probably derived from its serial number. If that isn't working properly, fixing it should fix your recurring CUPS issues. If udev is behaving properly, then perhaps CUPS is latching on to something more transient. IIRC the issue in my particular case is related to loading and unloading the usblp module. I have an HP LaserJet 1020 and use foo2zjs. Attaching the printer must be done in this order: modprobe usblp plug in printer rmmod usblp If I plug in then printer without usblp (if I have blacklisted the module), it won't work. If I plug in the printer and leave usblp loaded, it won't work. I must load usblp, plug in the printer and then rmmod usblp. If I add the printer in CUPS when it's in the wrong state, it won't work either. Usually I screw around with deleting/adding the printer until I remember what the solution was in the first place. :)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On 6 September 2011 19:57, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: The support for lpr exists. It's being removed, for some reason. Given that printing works by constructing a postscript equivalent of the thing being printed, just how difficult can it be to squirt this postscript down lpr rather than the cups equivalent? How long does it take to write a C++ `if' statement? We're all happily waiting for you to do it ... time yourself! :)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi, Canek. Hi Alan. On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 02:22:44PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: However, I use lprng, not cups. It's good that we have a choice over what software we use, isn't it? ;-( It could be that IPP is just becoming the preferred protocol, and other print queue managing protocols are going the way of Gopher. Preferred by whom? Firefox, for example, manages lprng just fine. It's really not a big deal supporting an extra spooler interface, particularly a simple one. Because, as simple as it could be, it's another one. Big projects need to support CUPS, because they need to work for everyone (or as many as possible). It makes no sense *at all* to support more printing systems. It enables more people to use it. I disagree. CUPS does everything that lprng does (AFAIK), so using CUPS serves all users. The support for lpr exists. It's being removed, for some reason. Yeah, nobody wants to maintain that code (if it's LO decision), or Gentoo devs don't want to help users of two different printing systems, when one of them does everything everybody wants. Either way, it's work that has to be done. Even if it's small. Given that printing works by constructing a postscript equivalent of the thing being printed, just how difficult can it be to squirt this postscript down lpr rather than the cups equivalent? How long does it take to write a C++ `if' statement? Point a, you are oversimplifying. Point b, again, code is not a fixed entity that remains forever unchanged. The old adage of if it's not broke, don't fix it it's completely false with code, because around that code *everything* changes. All the time. Just an example: C++ changes its syntax for something that affects the lprng and CUPS methods inside LibreOffice (this happens a lot, BTW, especially with C++). Now you need to fix the code in two places, not in one. And that just to support a printing system, with a functionality that is available *in the other* printing system. THAT is insane. And again, it's Open Source. If there is enough demand, someone will write support for other printing systems. Just don't assume that any project (being LibreOffice or Gentoo) need to support your choices besides the most used one. Again the code already exists, it's merely a matter of not destroying it. I became a user based on it supporting a standard printing system, and it's perfectly reasonable for me to expect that support to continue. Sorry, but again I disagree. You became a user of an Open Source piece of code. If it breaks, you get to keep the pieces, and that's about it. Read the GPL license: ... is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. So, sorry, but neither you (nor I) get to complain if lprng stops being supported, nor if CUPS suddenly were to be dropped. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Hi, C. Last mail before I take Sebastian's advice. ;-) On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 03:20:59PM -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Alan Mackenzie a...@muc.de wrote: Hi Alan. Point a, you are oversimplifying. Indeed. :-) THAT is insane. I think I am, too. And again, it's Open Source. If there is enough demand, someone will write support for other printing systems. Just don't assume that any project (being LibreOffice or Gentoo) need to support your choices besides the most used one. Again the code already exists, it's merely a matter of not destroying it. I became a user based on it supporting a standard printing system, and it's perfectly reasonable for me to expect that support to continue. Sorry, but again I disagree. You became a user of an Open Source piece of code. If it breaks, you get to keep the pieces, and that's about it. Read the GPL license: ... is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Thankfully, there are many, many hackers who, despite the legal lack of responsibility, actually do support their projects effectively. As I aspire to do with mine. As I presume you do with yours too. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Thanks for these exchanges this evening. I've learnt quite a bit. So, it's good night from me, good afternoon to you! -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tuesday, September 6 at 18:57 (+), Alan Mackenzie said: The support for lpr exists. It's being removed, for some reason. Given that printing works by constructing a postscript equivalent of the thing being printed, just how difficult can it be to squirt this postscript down lpr rather than the cups equivalent? How long does it take to write a C++ `if' statement? The latest lprng available in portage was released in 2004. The latest version of lprng released was released in 2010 but isn't even in portage... There is a bump request, but it was created 2 years ago and so far no takers (and no CC's). My guess is that ratio of the the demand for the packages vs. willing maintainers is close to nil and that lprng is no longer considered ng. As far as the simple if statement. If it were that simple you could just do it yourself ;-) And again, it's Open Source. If there is enough demand, someone will write support for other printing systems. Just don't assume that any project (being LibreOffice or Gentoo) need to support your choices besides the most used one. Again the code already exists, it's merely a matter of not destroying it. It's also a matter of maintaining it. When code changes around it, someone has to go in and fix that part of the code and verify that it still works. Chances are there's no one doing that, probably because most people have moved to cups).
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On 2011-09-06, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-09-06, Neil Bothwickn...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:25:22 +0100, Stroller wrote: Isn't CUPS really bug and bloaty and horrible? It's definitely huge. It does however seem to work pretty well. Huge? root@fireball / # equery s cups * net-print/cups-1.5.0-r2 Total files : 482 Total size : 6.41 MiB root@fireball / # If that is considered huge, we have a new standard. lol I stand corrected. For some reason I was under the impression it was a lot bigger than that. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! Boys, you have ALL at been selected to LEAVE th' gmail.comPLANET in 15 minutes!!
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On 2011-09-06, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Nobody is forcing you to anything: but upstream projects (like LibreOffice) need to fulfill the needs of all their users... not only you. Don't force *them* to support every single printing system in the planet earth; I wasn't complaining about lack of support for other printing systems. I was complaining about the lack of support for _no_ printing system. It seems dumb to make somebody without a printer install CUPs seems. Because the Open Source community has limited resources. The LibreOffice devs (or maybe the Gentoo ones) choose to support CUPS and only CUPS, because it takes care of the most cases, not only yours. What about the lack of a CUPS install would make LibreOffice fail? Does LibreOffice depend on libraries provided by CUPS even if you don't want to print? As for cups being huge, the standard install comprises over 500 files. That's still huge in my book. -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! I have the power to at HALT PRODUCTION on all gmail.comTEENAGE SEX COMEDIES!!
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-06, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: As for cups being huge, the standard install comprises over 500 files. That's still huge in my book. Most of those are going to be ppd files, right? File a bug asking for 'use' flags, or an ebuild split, or some other mechanism to only install a subset of those. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-06, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Nobody is forcing you to anything: but upstream projects (like LibreOffice) need to fulfill the needs of all their users... not only you. Don't force *them* to support every single printing system in the planet earth; I wasn't complaining about lack of support for other printing systems. And I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to Alan. I was complaining about the lack of support for _no_ printing system. It seems dumb to make somebody without a printer install CUPs seems. I don't have a printer, and I need CUPS. Again, it's not about the necessities of one user (being you or me), it's about the necessities of the majority. And the majority of users installing LibreOffice *need* printing support. And CUPS is the best option available. Because the Open Source community has limited resources. The LibreOffice devs (or maybe the Gentoo ones) choose to support CUPS and only CUPS, because it takes care of the most cases, not only yours. What about the lack of a CUPS install would make LibreOffice fail? Does LibreOffice depend on libraries provided by CUPS even if you don't want to print? That's not the point: the point is that you want to force *another* configuration that the devs have to test and maintain and QA, and you don't seem to care that your use-case is not very common. In other words: if the devs keep allowing LO without CUPS support, they need to spend time and effort to make sure that this option works. On the other hand, if they make CUPS mandatory they only need to worry about the normal/common case of users of office suites having the need to print, and the cost is to force a tiny (less than 10 Mb program) to some (very few) users. As for cups being huge, the standard install comprises over 500 files. That's still huge in my book. Again, if you are installing LibreOffice, which has 3098 files and uses 260 Mb of hd space, it makes no sense at all that you complain against CUPS size. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Michael Mol mike...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Grant Edwards grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011-09-06, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: As for cups being huge, the standard install comprises over 500 files. That's still huge in my book. Most of those are going to be ppd files, right? File a bug asking for 'use' flags, or an ebuild split, or some other mechanism to only install a subset of those. Actually, in my case I only have 9 ppd files in my computer, none of them installed by CUPS. The bulk of files in net-print/cups is man pages (51), html pages for the web interface (110) and templates (140). Right there is thr 60% of the whole package. Really, CUPS is a very small daemon for all the things it does. I don't see any gain by splitting the package. Regards -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 21:12:32 schrieb Grant Edwards: On 2011-09-06, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s can...@gmail.com wrote: Nobody is forcing you to anything: but upstream projects (like LibreOffice) need to fulfill the needs of all their users... not only you. Don't force *them* to support every single printing system in the planet earth; I wasn't complaining about lack of support for other printing systems. I was complaining about the lack of support for _no_ printing system. It seems dumb to make somebody without a printer install CUPs seems. Agreed. It could be useful to have cups splitted into client and server ebuilds. Or to have a server-USE for it. I don't know, if this is possible at all or how much work this would be. ebuilds like LO could then depend on cups- client or still work with server-disabled cups. Because the Open Source community has limited resources. The LibreOffice devs (or maybe the Gentoo ones) choose to support CUPS and only CUPS, because it takes care of the most cases, not only yours. What about the lack of a CUPS install would make LibreOffice fail? Does LibreOffice depend on libraries provided by CUPS even if you don't want to print? As for cups being huge, the standard install comprises over 500 files. That's still huge in my book. Afaict most of these files are related to the web-frontend. And 500 files isn't that much. See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB compared to another browser ~ $ equery s konqueror * kde-base/konqueror-4.7.0 Total files : 255 Total size : 5.81 MiB :) Regards, Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB Mysterious, nearly ten times bigger. Greetings Sebastian Beßler signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-09-06, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2011-09-06, Neil Bothwickn...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:25:22 +0100, Stroller wrote: Isn't CUPS really bug and bloaty and horrible? It's definitely huge. It does however seem to work pretty well. Huge? root@fireball / # equery s cups * net-print/cups-1.5.0-r2 Total files : 482 Total size : 6.41 MiB root@fireball / # If that is considered huge, we have a new standard. lol I stand corrected. For some reason I was under the impression it was a lot bigger than that. I thought so. If it was huge, I was hoping you would post yours. Maybe you have more stuff turned on that I do or something. I do like the next reply in this thread tho. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Sebastian Beßler sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote: Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB Mysterious, nearly ten times bigger. Mine is bigger! ;) * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3517 Total size : 723.57 MiB libxul.so by itself is around 350MB. I have nostrip in my FEATURES. I guess that's the reason... Rebuilt without nostrip. The results: * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3517 Total size : 88.97 MiB Mystery solved? :)
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Dale: If it was huge, I was hoping you would post yours. Maybe you have more stuff turned on that I do or something. hafi@i5 ~ $ equery s cups * net-print/cups-1.4.8-r1 Total files : 578 Total size : 9 MiB hafi@i5 ~ $ Hartmut -- Usenet-ABC-Wiki http://www.usenet-abc.de/wiki/ Von Usern fuer User :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Sebastian Beßler sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote: Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB Mysterious, nearly ten times bigger. Mine is bigger! ;) * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3517 Total size : 723.57 MiB libxul.so by itself is around 350MB. I have nostrip in my FEATURES. I guess that's the reason... Rebuilt without nostrip. The results: * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3517 Total size : 88.97 MiB Mystery solved? :) Seems I left nostrip enabled for quite some time by accident... check out this one: * kde-base/kdelibs-4.7.0-r1 Total files : 24538 Total size : 1.12 GiB
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 23:52:34 schrieb Sebastian Beßler: Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? dunno I have FEATURES splitdebug enabled, but that shouldn't make that much difference. alsa crashreporter dbus ipc libnotify linguas_de methodjit startup- notification webm is my USE for FF. I'm running ~amd64 metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB Mysterious, nearly ten times bigger. Yes, mysterious indeed. Greetings Sebastian Beßler Regards, Michael
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Sebastian Beßler: metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB hafi@i5 ~ $ equery s seamonkey * www-client/seamonkey-2.0.14-r1 Total files : 412 Total size : 44.03 MiB ;) Hartmut -- Usenet-ABC-Wiki http://www.usenet-abc.de/wiki/ Von Usern fuer User :-)
Big Firefox (Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?)
Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 17:30:54 schrieb Paul Hartman: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Sebastian Beßler sebast...@darkmetatron.de wrote: Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB Mysterious, nearly ten times bigger. Mine is bigger! ;) * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3517 Total size : 723.57 MiB libxul.so by itself is around 350MB. I have nostrip in my FEATURES. I guess that's the reason... Rebuilt without nostrip. The results: * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3517 Total size : 88.97 MiB Mystery solved? :) Hm. My libxul.so is ~29MB. ~ $ du -hs /usr/lib64/firefox/ 65M /usr/lib64/firefox/ Looks like my equery is broken *g* Regards, Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 21:12:32 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote: What about the lack of a CUPS install would make LibreOffice fail? Does LibreOffice depend on libraries provided by CUPS even if you don't want to print? Why don't you try it? Unmerge cups and see if LO still works for you. If it does, add cups to /etc/portage/profile/package.provided. -- Neil Bothwick Ninety-Ninety Rule Of Project Schedules - The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent of the time. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer grim...@gmx.dewrote: Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 23:52:34 schrieb Sebastian Beßler: Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? dunno I have FEATURES splitdebug enabled, but that shouldn't make that much difference. alsa crashreporter dbus ipc libnotify linguas_de methodjit startup- notification webm is my USE for FF. I'm running ~amd64 metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB Mysterious, nearly ten times bigger. Yes, mysterious indeed. Greetings Sebastian Beßler Regards, Michael I also have a ~750 MiB firefox and it is because of the splitdebug feature. Take a look at this: 348M/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/firefox/sdk/lib/libxul.so.debug 348M/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/firefox/libxul.so.debug Lots of debug info I guess... --Brennan
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am Mittwoch, 7. September 2011, 00:43:29 schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: Am Dienstag, 6. September 2011, 23:52:34 schrieb Sebastian Beßler: Am 06.09.2011 23:35, schrieb Michael Schreckenbauer: See firefox for example: ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3801 Total size : 722.95 MiB Why is your firefox so big? dunno I have FEATURES splitdebug enabled, but that shouldn't make that much difference. ... but it is. 634MB *wow* Mystery solved. Regards, Michael
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Am 07.09.2011 00:39, schrieb Hartmut Figge: Sebastian Beßler: metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB hafi@i5 ~ $ equery s seamonkey * www-client/seamonkey-2.0.14-r1 Total files : 412 Total size : 44.03 MiB And that after Mozilla droped the suite because it was so big and clumsy. What a change can a few years make ;-) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Hartmut Figge wrote: Dale: If it was huge, I was hoping you would post yours. Maybe you have more stuff turned on that I do or something. hafi@i5 ~ $ equery s cups * net-print/cups-1.4.8-r1 Total files : 578 Total size : 9 MiB hafi@i5 ~ $ Hartmut I'm running 1.5. At least we know it grows when watered. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Sebastian Beßler wrote: Am 07.09.2011 00:39, schrieb Hartmut Figge: Sebastian Beßler: metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB hafi@i5 ~ $ equery s seamonkey * www-client/seamonkey-2.0.14-r1 Total files : 412 Total size : 44.03 MiB And that after Mozilla droped the suite because it was so big and clumsy. What a change can a few years make ;-) Hmmm. root@fireball / # equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-3.6.20 Total files : 89 Total size : 3.51 MiB root@fireball / # equery s seamonkey * www-client/seamonkey-2.3.1 Total files : 118 Total size : 41.13 MiB root@fireball / # My firefox is really small. scratches head Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Dale writes: Sebastian Beßler wrote: Am 07.09.2011 00:39, schrieb Hartmut Figge: Sebastian Beßler: metatron@Shao ~ $ equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-6.0 Total files : 3779 Total size : 89.42 MiB hafi@i5 ~ $ equery s seamonkey * www-client/seamonkey-2.0.14-r1 Total files : 412 Total size : 44.03 MiB And that after Mozilla droped the suite because it was so big and clumsy. What a change can a few years make ;-) Hmmm. root@fireball / # equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-3.6.20 Total files : 89 Total size : 3.51 MiB root@fireball / # equery s seamonkey * www-client/seamonkey-2.3.1 Total files : 118 Total size : 41.13 MiB root@fireball / # My firefox is really small. scratches head You are still using Firefox 3, which is quite small because it makes use of net-libs/xulrunner. Firefox 6 uses its own bundled xulrunner stuff, so this package is much larger. Wonko
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
Dale: root@fireball / # equery s firefox * www-client/firefox-3.6.20 Total files : 89 Total size : 3.51 MiB root@fireball / # equery s seamonkey That one is an old FF, 4.0b3pre, extracted from a .tar,bz2: hafi@i5 ~/ff/firefox $ du -hs . 32M Hm. * www-client/seamonkey-2.3.1 Total files : 118 Total size : 41.13 MiB root@fireball / # And this is my current self-compiled Trunk-SM, 2.6a1: hafi@i5 ~/seam/1109070013/seamonkey $ du -hs . 39M My firefox is really small. scratches head Amazing. :) Hartmut -- Usenet-ABC-Wiki http://www.usenet-abc.de/wiki/ Von Usern fuer User :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: What is up with the libreoffice ebuild?
On 2011-09-05, Alex Schuster wo...@wonkology.org wrote: Graham Murray wonders: Has the libreoffice ebuild suddenly developed stability problems? Today is the 4th time in five days that my daily ~x86 emerge uD world has rebuilt libreoffice. On 1st Sept it was because of a use flag change, then the next day a new version was put in the tree, then there was an -r1 release and today there is yet another use flag change. Same here on ~amd64. The last change is that cups is mandatory now, What?? So if I don't have a printer, and have no intention of printing anything from this system, libreoffice requires that I install Cups? Sounds like it's time to switch back to OOo. -- Grant
