Re: [arch-general] Ubunto to Arch complete data migration
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 21:58, Jens John wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Aug 2019, at 21:02, Matt Zand via arch-general wrote: > > 1- what is the easiest way to do this? > > rsync -aAXv --progress --human-readable $source $destination > > > 2- do I need to partition hard-drive of new PC exactly as old one? > > No. > > > 3- will root and other user credentials stay the same? > > No, because I wouldn't recommend overwriting the default shadow and passwd > files without fixing and matching UIDs/GIDs for system accounts already > present in Arch. > > Yes, because of course you can set passwords and secrets as you see fit. > > Treat data and system configuration as different entities; the rest will > follow. Unfortunately, for some software packages the configuration files are not positioned in the same place. Take for example httpd (apache), while Arch keeps its configuration files in the commonly used directory /etc/httpd, Ubuntu uses /etc/apache2. So a simple rsync will not put everything in the exact place you need. My workflow when I did change my laptop from Fedora to Arch was to simply check for each package I installed (because you will have to install them) the correct configuration path, and manually merge the configuration files from my old laptop with the default ones provided with the package. It's a bit of work, but in the long run will familiarize you with the "right" places in which those configurations should go.
Re: [arch-general] NetBeans 9.0 not a drop-in replacement of 8.2
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 09:05, Leonidas Spyropoulos via arch-general
wrote:
>
> On 12/11/18, Danila Kiver via arch-general wrote:
> > Agree, NB 9.0 is a complete headache and probably should not be considered
> > an *upgrade* from 8.2. Even upcoming NB 10.0 does not seem to solve
> > all the migration issues.
> >
> > Maybe Apache Netbeans (9.0 and higher) has to be distributed as a different
> > package ("apache-netbeans"), conflicting with old "netbeans" package?
> >
> > This way would allow manual upgrade (by installing "apache-netbeans")
> > from old good NB 8.0 to Apache NB when it will be good enough to replace it.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Danila Kiver.
> >
> Hi Danila,
>
> A package mainatainer should not make such decisions for the users. If
> you don't like it you have the option to not update and stick to the
> 8.2. If you think that this could benefit others then submit a package
> in AUR as suggested already. You can use the history of the package to
> fetch the 8.2 version of PKBUILD [1] and push it to AUR with netbeans8
> name (probably conflicts / provides netbeans).
>
> Cheers,
> Leonidas
>
> [1]:
> https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/netbeans&id=bfdf023d7e3506227ffed92abaaa7a5e9e5d107d
>
> --
> Leonidas Spyropoulos
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
As I understand, it's common, and the good way to have NB9.0 in
community repository.
I have since then put the package in IgnorePkg and kept using the 8.2 version.
There are actually AUR packages for NB8.2 [1], and the nightly version
of NB9.0 [2] which
can be compiled with all the plugins that are not distributable in binary form.
Let's suppose I want to create an AUR package to compile the full
version of Netbeans 9.0,
but I don't want it to conflict the preexisting version installed from
community, what is the correct
course of action?
In which path should I install it?
Leandro
[1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/netbeans8/
[2] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/netbeans-incubator/
--
L'ignoranza è un male curabile, è sufficiente la volontà.
Please don't print this e-mail if you don't need to!
[arch-general] NetBeans 9.0 not a drop-in replacement of 8.2
Hello, I'm not sure if this has to be brought up here, please advise. I have had many problems with netbeans package from community, it "upgraded" my old version of the package (was version 8.2), but it is not an adequate replacement. I'm aware of the bugs open in the tracker, and I thank everyone that provided workarounds to get the IDE working at first, then finally installing plugins correctly. However, the "new" version isn't complete yet, it lacks many of the "core" plugins that were available for 8.2, for example PHP (postponed to netbeans 10), JavaScript and C++ language support. I'm wondering what the correct procedure is in this case, if it were a commercial product,it would have reverted to 8.2 until it was ready. I don't have issues using it, I'm keeping it downgraded to 8.2, ignored in pacman.conf, I'm only asking if this is the correct approach for a repository package, since this is not AUR. Thanks, Leandro -- L'ignoranza è un male curabile, è sufficiente la volontà. Please don't print this e-mail if you don't need to!
Re: [arch-general] How to have multiple JDKs parallel?
If I may pitch in with my 2 cents, The fact that Java 10 replaces Java 9 is a call made by Oracle, as described in their roadmap (https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html) [...]Java SE 9 was a non‑LTS release and immediately superseded by Java SE 10 (also non‑LTS), Java SE 10 in turn is immediately superseded by Java SE 11[...] So it may not be an error having the successive packages removing the previous ones, this behaviour will stop at Java 11, which will be a LTS release, and Java 12 will not need to replace Java 11. It's their release schedule, and I don't know if it would be better to adhere to their guidelines or not, but I'm sure I'd like to leave this choice to the user. (Sorry for any unsightly formatting, it's my first reply to the mailing list, and I'm using gmail, if there is something wrong please take the time to guide me through my errors in a separate thread.) -- L'ignoranza è un male curabile, è sufficiente la volontà. Please don't print this e-mail if you don't need to!
Re: [arch-general] 3.15 kernel breaking X ?
On 7 July 2014 10:21, Daniel Petre wrote: > On 07/07/14 07:25, Achilleas Pipinellis wrote: > >> On 07/06/2014 09:17 PM, Daniel Petre wrote: >> >>> Hey there, >>> i just installed Arch on a x61s thinkpad using xf86-video-intel of >>> course but it seems Cinnamon starts and gives a black unresponsive >>> screen while booting and trying on linux-lts works absolutely fine.. >>> Anyone has any idea ? Thanks! >>> >> >> Intel you say? Check this bug https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/40899 >> Basically, stick with a 3.14 kernel for the moment. >> >> > Apologies but i do not know how to reinstall the 3.14 kernel, linux is > 3.15 and linux-lts is 3.10.. > Can i get from some repo the 3.14 package? > Thanks. > > I use "downgrade" available in AUR
