Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 06:39 +0200, Christos Nouskas wrote: > Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > > I know, but why would anyone in their right mind put some tro^Wguy's > > > custom repo _before_ the official ones, especially when the provided > > > packages are not the nightly builds of but ones > > > like xorg-server? > > > > In the preceding conversations some have said they would. The whole > > point of his repo is to maintain separate versions of xorg-server sans > > some bloat. > > IMO, custom packages providing different functionality (or having > important different dependencies for that matter) should have different > names, e.g. nvidia-beta, kernel26-bfs, skype-oss, [kdemod-*], [nightly]. > At the very least, it allows for for faster troubleshooting. Again, IMO. > =) There's been plenty of opinions in this discussion. I'd tend to agree that different names for significantly different functionality/patching is necessary, but for some compile-time options REMOVING functionality? Probably still a yes, but much more open to interpretation.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
Ng Oon-Ee wrote: > > I know, but why would anyone in their right mind put some tro^Wguy's > > custom repo _before_ the official ones, especially when the provided > > packages are not the nightly builds of but ones > > like xorg-server? > > In the preceding conversations some have said they would. The whole > point of his repo is to maintain separate versions of xorg-server sans > some bloat. IMO, custom packages providing different functionality (or having important different dependencies for that matter) should have different names, e.g. nvidia-beta, kernel26-bfs, skype-oss, [kdemod-*], [nightly]. At the very least, it allows for for faster troubleshooting. Again, IMO. -- X.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Tue, 2009-12-08 at 05:29 +0200, Christos Nouskas wrote: > Ray Kohler wrote: > > > Suggestions: > > > > > > 1. Rename all your packages appropriately (e.g. append -heresy or > > > -nodbus or -whatever). This way your packages won't get unistalled if > > > they lag behind the official ones. > > > > No, this isn't how pacman works. If his repo comes before the official > > ones in pacman.conf, it will override them regardless of version > > comparisons. > > > I know, but why would anyone in their right mind put some tro^Wguy's > custom repo _before_ the official ones, especially when the provided > packages are not the nightly builds of but ones like > xorg-server? > In the preceding conversations some have said they would. The whole point of his repo is to maintain separate versions of xorg-server sans some bloat.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
Ray Kohler wrote: > > Suggestions: > > > > 1. Rename all your packages appropriately (e.g. append -heresy or > > -nodbus or -whatever). This way your packages won't get unistalled if > > they lag behind the official ones. > > No, this isn't how pacman works. If his repo comes before the official > ones in pacman.conf, it will override them regardless of version > comparisons. I know, but why would anyone in their right mind put some tro^Wguy's custom repo _before_ the official ones, especially when the provided packages are not the nightly builds of but ones like xorg-server? -- X.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Christos Nouskas wrote: > Arvid Picciani wrote: >> http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ >> >> Let me know if this solution works for everyone >> and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that >> site or the fact that it exists >> and/or if anything should be added to it. >> >> Contributors very welcome :) > > > Suggestions: > > 1. Rename all your packages appropriately (e.g. append -heresy or -nodbus > or -whatever). This way your packages won't get unistalled if they lag > behind the official ones. No, this isn't how pacman works. If his repo comes before the official ones in pacman.conf, it will override them regardless of version comparisons.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
Arvid Picciani wrote: > http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ > > Let me know if this solution works for everyone > and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that > site or the fact that it exists > and/or if anything should be added to it. > > Contributors very welcome :) Suggestions: 1. Rename all your packages appropriately (e.g. append -heresy or -nodbus or -whatever). This way your packages won't get unistalled if they lag behind the official ones. 2. Add your repo to the unofficial user repos at the wiki (http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Unofficial_user_repositories) 3. Make x86_64 builds (remember, the main reason of UURs is convenience, so that people don't have to compile themselves - otherwise ABS/AUR would suffice) 4. Rewrite some stuff in "philosophy", being polite never hurt anyone. -- X.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Robert Howard wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote: > >> The only change you made is to disable the hal >> stuff? The sole reason I still have an xorg.conf is so I can turn that >> option (AutoAddDevices) off. X detects my machine just fine except for >> that. >> >> Since when does xorg support automatic device configuration without HAL? I > thought that without HAL you would need a complete xorg.conf just like the > old days. Has this changed? It handles standard mice and keyboards just fine
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Aaron Griffin wrote: > The only change you made is to disable the hal > stuff? The sole reason I still have an xorg.conf is so I can turn that > option (AutoAddDevices) off. X detects my machine just fine except for > that. > > Since when does xorg support automatic device configuration without HAL? I thought that without HAL you would need a complete xorg.conf just like the old days. Has this changed?
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, bender02 wrote: > On 12/2/09, Arvid Picciani wrote: >> http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ >> >> Let me know if this solution works for everyone >> and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that >> site or the fact that it exists >> and/or if anything should be added to it. > > Regardless of the fact that I like this initiative, and might use > some, I find the site too "boasty": "large user base" ... "for power > users"... "unfixed packages that adhere to the arch way" > I would be more humble. After all, you're "fixing" only an extremely > small bit of the whole archlinux. > > Good luck, > Jan Actually, I propose to change the catchphrase to "Arch Linux for Minimalists". There's plenty of power users (called so because they know a lot about the system) and prefer to use gnome/kde.
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On 12/2/09, Arvid Picciani wrote: > http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ > > Let me know if this solution works for everyone > and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that > site or the fact that it exists > and/or if anything should be added to it. Regardless of the fact that I like this initiative, and might use some, I find the site too "boasty": "large user base" ... "for power users"... "unfixed packages that adhere to the arch way" I would be more humble. After all, you're "fixing" only an extremely small bit of the whole archlinux. Good luck, Jan
Re: [arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Arvid Picciani wrote: > http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ > > Let me know if this solution works for everyone > and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that > site or the fact that it exists > and/or if anything should be added to it. > > Contributors very welcome :) This is exactly in the spirit of the whole arch community thing. As an FYI, I may use your xorg-server package myself (I won't have to recompile it myself). The only change you made is to disable the hal stuff? The sole reason I still have an xorg.conf is so I can turn that option (AutoAddDevices) off. X detects my machine just fine except for that. Would you mind throwing the PKGBUILDs you use up there as well?
[arch-general] ArchLinux AntiDesktop (was: Another rant on arch way abuse and false promises)
http://heresy.asgaartech.com/ Let me know if this solution works for everyone and/or if anyone is offended by anything on that site or the fact that it exists and/or if anything should be added to it. Contributors very welcome :) -- Arvid Asgaard Technologies
