Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
Graham Murray wrote: Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com writes: There are times that if portage removed a config file, I would not be happy. Sometimes I unmerge a package then remerge but want to keep the config files. Would I like there to be the option, yep, I sure would. There are also times when I want to get rid of a package and all its config files. The option would be nice but it should be a option. I think that the ideal would be if portage could set some kind of 'marker' so that etc-update, dispatch-conf etc could prompt the user as to whether to keep or remove the orphaned file. That would work and may even be better. Either way, keeping unneeded config files out would be good. We got tools to clean out everything else so may as well have that too. Now getting someone to come up with one, that could be interesting for sure. Since portage has so many options already, I wonder what letter it would get? Are there even any good ones left. Maybe it would be a number like oneshot. o_O Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:08 AM, David W Noon dwn...@ntlworld.com wrote: On Mon, 30 May 2011 21:20:01 +0200, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files: On Mon, 30 May 2011 19:05:10 +0100, David W Noon wrote: [snip] The only algorithmic approach with which I would feel comfortable would be if the file were checked against the previous contents of a package and found present, but has disappeared from the new contents of that same package. Even then, I would want manual confirmation. That omits the most common cause of orphaned files, that the package owning it has been unmerged. You have just touched on an annoyance of unmerge, in that it does not clean up configuration files that have been modified. It removes files that are still in the same state as when the package was emerged, but not those modified by the user. I don't see how user changes make the file more important than would be in its vanilla state. Perhaps an option to remove (by an unmerge, not etc-update or the like) these genuinely orphaned files could be set in /etc/make.conf. The logic appears to be that an unmodified file will be re-instated as-is should the package be re-merged, so nothing changes. A modified config file is more problematic - if the package is re-merged, which version should be used? The old one or the new vanilla one? Presumably the user modified the file last time round for a reason and that reason might still be valid. Only one sensible choice remains - present both files to the human user and ask them to decide. If memory serves, this is in some doc somewhere, I know I read it long ago but don't remember where. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Meh, I clicked 'Send' too fast. *My* suggested solution: Generate an initramfs containing udev. The hands-down easiest way is using genkernel's 'only create an initramfs' switch (sorry I forgot what exactly). good god no, please, anything but genkernel. That thing is an attempt to emulate binary distros which require an initramfs to work properly (for any sane definition of work) as the person building the installer has no idea what hardware the user will have. In Gentoo the user knows exactly what they have so there's no need for a gigantic hardware-detecting workaround at boot time. This needs to be done exactly once throughout the life of your VM. (To the herd of Gentoo graybeards, feel free to CMIIW) Or wait a few days for vapier's (posting under his other name of spanky) sane advice to be implemented. His proposal is the sole voice of reason in that bug thread Another alternative would be to mknod all required devices for booting. But, as evidenced in the bug I've linked to earlier, you might have to create more than 20 devs. Not a good use of time, if you ask me. Except if you're one of the guys doing the bug exorcising :) Oh, and please forgive my top-postings. Gmail's Java mobile client sucks. Rgds, On 2011-05-31, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: In preparation for the upcoming upgrade to gnome3, I've installed the latest gentoo snapshot to a new virtualbox machine. (So I can trash my virtual gentoo machine instead of my real gentoo machine :) The virtual install went perfectly AFAICT, except for building a new customized kernel for the gentoo virtualbox machine. Here's what I did to configure my new customized gentoo kernel: I booted the gentoo install iso image in virtualbox and did lspci -k and wrote down all the drivers it displayed. I also booted my virtualbox ubuntu machine and did lspci -k and again wrote down all the listed drivers. (Only one extra driver showed up in ubuntu and I included it in my list of drivers to-be-installed.) I configured my new gentoo custom kernel to use all of the drivers I'd gathered from the steps above, and compiled and installed it without any problems. However, when I reboot the virtual gentoo guest machine with my new customized kernel, the boot hangs forever after discovering devices and mounting the root partition.ro. Obviously I've configured my custom kernel incorrectly, but how? If any of you have virtualbox guest gentoo machines running with a custom kernel, would you please post your guest .config file for my edification? Many thanks! -- -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/ -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
Cfg-update has such a logic. It looks for user changes, If there are decisions to make at all and previous decisions. Ihatethespellcheckerofmyphone. Am 31.05.2011 08:49 schrieb Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:08 AM, David W Noon dwn...@ntlworld.com wrote: On Mon, 30 May 2011 21... The logic appears to be that an unmodified file will be re-instated as-is should the package be re-merged, so nothing changes. A modified config file is more problematic - if the package is re-merged, which version should be used? The old one or the new vanilla one? Presumably the user modified the file last time round for a reason and that reason might still be valid. Only one sensible choice remains - present both files to the human user and ask them to decide. If memory serves, this is in some doc somewhere, I know I read it long ago but don't remember where. -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 13:56, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Meh, I clicked 'Send' too fast. *My* suggested solution: Generate an initramfs containing udev. The hands-down easiest way is using genkernel's 'only create an initramfs' switch (sorry I forgot what exactly). good god no, please, anything but genkernel. That thing is an attempt to emulate binary distros which require an initramfs to work properly (for any sane definition of work) as the person building the installer has no idea what hardware the user will have. In Gentoo the user knows exactly what they have so there's no need for a gigantic hardware-detecting workaround at boot time. This needs to be done exactly once throughout the life of your VM. (To the herd of Gentoo graybeards, feel free to CMIIW) Or wait a few days for vapier's (posting under his other name of spanky) sane advice to be implemented. His proposal is the sole voice of reason in that bug thread True. But I was having problem installing 2 servers on top of XenServer. So I cheated and ran 'genkernel initramfs' exactly once. At least I got myself a booting system. :-) When SpanKY's makedev gets stabilized and pushed to baselayout, I'll then happily ditch the genkernel cheat for my next VMs :-) Rgds, -- Pandu E Poluan ~ IT Optimizer ~ Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Mon, 30 May 2011 23:08:08 +0100, David W Noon wrote: You have just touched on an annoyance of unmerge, in that it does not clean up configuration files that have been modified. It removes files that are still in the same state as when the package was emerged, but not those modified by the user. I don't see how user changes make the file more important than would be in its vanilla state. It doesn't remove *any* files that have been modified, the reasons systems used to get cluttered with orphaned .la files. The logic is quite simple, if it is not the file portage installed with the package, it should not be uninstalled with the package. There are times when some sort of --force-remove option to remove both these and files in CONFIG_PROTECTed directories would be useful. -- Neil Bothwick Format: (v.) to erase irrevocably and unintentionally. (n.) The process of such erasure. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] setting locale
On Mon, 30 May 2011 22:34:46 +0200 Nils Larsson wrote: Eh... Right, so ... The echo example might have been a bit blunt. I've found myself using echo examples as a general you need to add this setting here device, like you learn to do when you start using Gentoo, might have been a bit presumptuous of me. As for the incorrect locale string, copypaste from parent. Why not use echo ... ?? Since the does an append, the original file contents are still available for reference. Since the added line is at the end of the file, the new value will be used instead of the old value.
Re: [gentoo-user] Goodbye, Gentoo
Alan McKinnon writes: Apparently, though unproven, at 01:28 on Friday 27 May 2011, Kevin O'Gorman did opine thusly: It looks like it's time to take Gentoo off of my main machine. I feel a little sad about it, or I'd just quietly go away. I know how you feel :-) I've tried to get away from Gentoo several times, and failed. The amount of work we all put into keeping things working is best described as bat shit crazy, but we do it anyway. Maybe it's like a drug thing, we all need a daily fix or we need to prove we can still do it. I tried various distros (SuSE, Debian, Mandrake, Libranet, RedHat), but when I started using Gentoo, I was hooked. No fancy shmancy GUIs that hide what's really going on beneath, and that often enough have their own bugs so that it's easier to not use them. Rolling updates, no fear that upgrades mess up everything. Good documentation, that explains what has do be done and why, instead of just telling me what to do and where to click. Yes, Gentoo means a lot of work to do. But for me it's less than before, all in all. And I can fix many things myself. When I had trouble with other distros, I was often unable so find a solution, apart from waiting for the next release. Which introduced new problems. I installed some Ubuntus recently, that's supposed to be very easy to use, but not for me. The default install medium does not know much about LVM, I had to fetch an alternate install medium for this. After all updates were done, I ran into an old bug that killed all initramfs images after installing a new kernel. I found some threads of users who had no clue what to do now, in my case even older kernels were affected. It was simple to fix, but not for inexperienced users who had no clue what to do, apart from waiting for some Linux guy to help them or re-install. NIS and automount stuff sometimes fails, I was not able to find the cause for this, despite many threads mentioning this. Sometimes a simple reboot solves this, sometimes not. I have no clue. It seems to work well on standard desktop systems, though. If the default is fine for you, Ubuntu is not bad I think. easier to set up, easier to maintain. But then I installed it on a notebook with little RAM, and ran into various problems. The installer even crashed once. I use Linux a lot, I administer some Linux servers, but I felt too stupid to install Ubuntu and WLAN via ndiswrapper. And then there's things happening like the packet manager front-end refusing to start because the automatic update notification is still active, and only once instance of a package manager can be running at a time. Okay, this is not a big problem, just close the other application (or kill it, if another user has it open). But hey, with portage I can not only run queries while another portage process is running, I can even do it while emerge is installing things, and nowadays I can even have multiple emerges run in parallel without trouble. I got used to this. BTW, in the past when I used Debian (ten years ago), it happened for two times that apt (the package manager) got corrupted and no longer worked. I didn't even know what I did wrong, in one case I was only following advice others gave me. The mailing list was no help at all, they suggested to simply re-install. Oh my, how I hate to do so and to configure everything again. And wait for the problems to happens again. My Mom's new PC would get Ubuntu, as I do not want to spend too much time installing, and because she doesn't need much special configuring. But I think I will try ArchLinux which I heard good things of, but did not try yet. Wonko
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On May 31, 2011 3:02 AM, Neil Bothwick n...@digimed.co.uk wrote: On Mon, 30 May 2011 23:08:08 +0100, David W Noon wrote: You have just touched on an annoyance of unmerge, in that it does not clean up configuration files that have been modified. It removes files that are still in the same state as when the package was emerged, but not those modified by the user. I don't see how user changes make the file more important than would be in its vanilla state. It doesn't remove *any* files that have been modified, the reasons systems used to get cluttered with orphaned .la files. The logic is quite simple, if it is not the file portage installed with the package, it should not be uninstalled with the package. There are times when some sort of --force-remove option to remove both these and files in CONFIG_PROTECTed directories would be useful. If you want to ensure that portage removes a configuration file then add CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK=/etc to the unmerge line and portage will remove the configuration files as well. James Wall -- Neil Bothwick Format: (v.) to erase irrevocably and unintentionally. (n.) The process of such erasure.
Re: [gentoo-user] [OT - More Router Advice] Cheap Router with decent/reliable VLAN support
* Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org [110530 16:40]: On 2011-05-28 8:42 PM, Gregory Shearman wrote: In linux.gentoo.user, Todd Goodman wrote: * Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org [110528 12:43]: Anyone? Will one of the FLOSS builds for the cheap Cable/DSL routers support VLANs on the different built-in router ports (ie, Tomato, DD-WRT or OpenWRT)? Looking forward to any suggestions/ideas... Hi, I'm pretty sure OpenWRT supports VLANs. I started using it on a Buffalo WHR-G300N (I think, not at home to check right now.) Cheap and I didn't expect much but it works great (far better than any Linksys or trendnet products I've purchased and run their firmware on.) I'll second that. I run a Buffalo Nfiniti WZR-HP-G300NH with openwrt installed. It is VLAN capable and has Gigabyte ethernet and b/g/n wifi. It also has a USB socket for extra disk storage if needed (or any other peripheral you fancy). It just sits in the corner and does its job. It is also very cheap. Thanks for the reco guys... will probably go with it... Is the VLAN configurable via the GUI? Or is it commandline only? I'm not exactly a whiz with this stuff... Also, any pointers to OpenWRT docs that cover creating VLANs? I obviously want to make sure I do it right... I'd hate to *think* I was secure and then find out the hard way I goofed when setting it up... ;) I'm not at home and haven't used VLANs on it but I'm pretty sure it supports GUI config of VLANs. I've found the GUI to be very well done once I got used to the navigation (which was counterintuitive at first to me, but then so are some commercial GUIs too.) Todd
Re: [gentoo-user] Goodbye, Gentoo
Apparently, though unproven, at 14:30 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Alex Schuster did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon writes: Apparently, though unproven, at 01:28 on Friday 27 May 2011, Kevin O'Gorman did opine thusly: It looks like it's time to take Gentoo off of my main machine. I feel a little sad about it, or I'd just quietly go away. I know how you feel :-) I've tried to get away from Gentoo several times, and failed. The amount of work we all put into keeping things working is best described as bat shit crazy, but we do it anyway. Maybe it's like a drug thing, we all need a daily fix or we need to prove we can still do it. I tried various distros (SuSE, Debian, Mandrake, Libranet, RedHat), but when I started using Gentoo, I was hooked. No fancy shmancy GUIs that hide what's really going on beneath, and that often enough have their own bugs so that it's easier to not use them. Rolling updates, no fear that upgrades mess up everything. Good documentation, that explains what has do be done and why, instead of just telling me what to do and where to click. That's what keep me on Gentoo for my own machines (bar one) and I have never needed to re-install it anywhere. But at work, things are different. Gentoo is banned from the -prod machines (the risk of some n00b admin running emerge uND world and walking away is too great, plus even just (deep) upgrading a single package is often more than a reasonable amount of work for someone who doesn't know portage. It's encouraged on -dev, mostly because I can change versions of almost anything with no hassle at all. A developer wants python-3.2 on a box that already has 2.4 and 2.7? No problem! I do run Ubuntu on the netbook, but I treat that like it was an Android device or a big web browser i.e. I don't try and get fancy and mostly stick with what the installer and apt want to do. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] How do I eject an audio CD inside Gnome?
Apparently, though unproven, at 13:46 on Monday 30 May 2011, Mick did opine thusly: e17 is the best desktop for me, because it is extremely light footed, has enough eye candy (if you need that) and it is relatively configurable. Until it becomes stable you'll need to compile it from svn. Alan, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by huge mind shift? Unless my mind shifted and wasn't aware of it! :)) I meant that for someone using e17 for the very first time they will find something quite unfamiliar. They'll also need to get into raster's head to some degree too :-) -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: openrc and /etc/modprobe.d/*
Apparently, though unproven, at 00:33 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Harry Putnam did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com writes: modules=fuse Which appears to be the proper syntax judging from the comments in the stub file provided (/etc/conf.d/modules). But `fuse' never gets auto loaded. There must be something more or different it needs. Your syntax is correct. I suspect a module loading issue (not a config issue). The answer is likely in your dmesg or messages log :-) can you successfully modprobe fuse after first login? Yes. No problems there at all The only mention of fuse in dmesg looks like: # dmesg|grep fuse [ 19.364168] fuse init (API version 7.13) Is fuse blacklisted? -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Install issue
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:22 on Monday 30 May 2011, Colleen Beamer did opine thusly: On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 9:47 AM, James Wall wallservi...@gmail.com wrote: I have had that particular problem if I mounted /dev before extracting the stage3 tarball. Just follow those instructions and you sill be fine. James Wall I tried doing the steps that I found in my google search as previously posted. It somewhat resolved the problem, but I still got error messages. Since I was tired at this point, I gave up. This morning, I tried what was suggested and used an earlier stage 3 tarball (Apr. 24th, I believe it was). This solved the problem and I was able to boot. Must have been an issue with the stage 3 tarball I had previously tried. Thanks for the help and comments, everyone! If you are interested in that kind of thing, the full detail of what the problem is can be found here: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=368597 -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tue, 31 May 2011 07:34:22 -0500, James Wall wrote: It doesn't remove *any* files that have been modified, the reasons systems used to get cluttered with orphaned .la files. The logic is quite simple, if it is not the file portage installed with the package, it should not be uninstalled with the package. There are times when some sort of --force-remove option to remove both these and files in CONFIG_PROTECTed directories would be useful. If you want to ensure that portage removes a configuration file then add CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK=/etc to the unmerge line and portage will remove the configuration files as well. That will only remove unmodified files, and to do that fully you need CONFIG_PROTECT=-*. Portage doesn't remove any files that have been modified since installation, whether they are in CONFIG_PROTECTEed paths or not. -- Neil Bothwick Did you know that eskimos have 17 different words for linguist ? signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Goodbye, Gentoo
On 31 May 2011 14:38, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 14:30 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Alex Schuster did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon writes: Apparently, though unproven, at 01:28 on Friday 27 May 2011, Kevin O'Gorman did opine thusly: It looks like it's time to take Gentoo off of my main machine. I feel a little sad about it, or I'd just quietly go away. I know how you feel :-) I've tried to get away from Gentoo several times, and failed. The amount of work we all put into keeping things working is best described as bat shit crazy, but we do it anyway. Maybe it's like a drug thing, we all need a daily fix or we need to prove we can still do it. I tried various distros (SuSE, Debian, Mandrake, Libranet, RedHat), but when I started using Gentoo, I was hooked. No fancy shmancy GUIs that hide what's really going on beneath, and that often enough have their own bugs so that it's easier to not use them. Rolling updates, no fear that upgrades mess up everything. Good documentation, that explains what has do be done and why, instead of just telling me what to do and where to click. That's what keep me on Gentoo for my own machines (bar one) and I have never needed to re-install it anywhere. But at work, things are different. Gentoo is banned from the -prod machines (the risk of some n00b admin running emerge uND world and walking away is too great, plus even just (deep) upgrading a single package is often more than a reasonable amount of work for someone who doesn't know portage. It's encouraged on -dev, mostly because I can change versions of almost anything with no hassle at all. A developer wants python-3.2 on a box that already has 2.4 and 2.7? No problem! I do run Ubuntu on the netbook, but I treat that like it was an Android device or a big web browser i.e. I don't try and get fancy and mostly stick with what the installer and apt want to do. These days I install OpenSUSE, CentOS, Debian and Ubuntu on *other* people's machines. I found out really early in the process of becoming familiar with Linux that Gentoo is the only self-healing OS for me. ;-) I had to reinstall Fedora twice, OpenSUSE 3 times and Ubuntu twice, because they kept corrupting themselves. Perhaps things have improved since (well I know that Ubuntu has improved significantly over the years) but nothing gives me the flexibility and breadth of choice that Gentoo does. On the other hand if one's needs are simple or conveniently met by the vanilla Ubuntu or other binary distro, then perhaps that's all they need to bother with. Updates are done in a matter of seconds and complete version upgrades completed in a matter of minutes. I was actually quite impressed last time that Ubuntu upgraded itself without breaking into a sweat. Given past experience I was expecting it to corrupt itself and not boot again without a bare bones reinstall - but was proven wrong! -- Regards, Mick
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Alain DIDIERJEAN alain.didierj...@free.fr wrote: Trying to update from kde4.5 to kde4.6 I find that it is easier to unmerge old version :4.5 KDE, then emerge the new version :4.6. Upgrade always seems to be a mess like that.
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Alain DIDIERJEAN alain.didierj...@free.fr wrote: Trying to update from kde4.5 to kde4.6 I find that it is easier to unmerge old version :4.5 KDE, then emerge the new version :4.6. Upgrade always seems to be a mess like that. Probably there's no real problem but I think in my recent machines if I've chosen the KDE profile and try something like emerge -Cp kde-meta then there are lots of warning messages about how I'm removing parts of @system. It's unlikely (in my mind anyway) that anything would be removed that stops one from doing the 4.6 emerge, but if one goes this way they should look very carefully at what's getting taken out just to make sure. Cheers, Mark
[gentoo-user] Re: [gentoo-user] time issue
Try to modify conf file /etc/conf.d/hwclock Sent from my HTC - Reply message - From: András Csányi sayusi.a...@gmail.com To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] time issue Date: Mon, May 30, 2011 16:15 Hi All, I have a little problem regarding time. After every boot I have to setup my clock because about my machine the current time is +2 hour more. To be honest, this is a little bit annoying. What I did: - According to install guide I have copied the /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/Budapest to /etc/localtime - According to localization guide [1] I have to set up the current timezone in the /etc/conf.d/clock file but this file is missing. I have checked it the original stage-3 pack from Hungarian mirror and I couldn't find there as well. I think this file is removed. So my question is that, what should I do to have the current time automatically (I'm in Hungary/Budapest)? Should I make a new clock file? [1] - http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/guide-localization.xml Thanks for any help in advance! András -- - - -- Csanyi Andras (Sayusi Ando) -- http://sayusi.hu -- http://facebook.com/andras.csanyi -- Trust in God and keep your gunpowder dry! - Cromwell
Re: [gentoo-user] setting locale
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 07:19:16AM -0400, David Relson wrote: Why not use echo ... ?? Since the does an append, the original file contents are still available for reference. Since the added line is at the end of the file, the new value will be used instead of the old value. In this case though, to set the locale properly, you should set LANG or LC_CTYPE and not set any of the other LC_* variables. If you are setting the other variables, those settings should be removed. William pgp3O9ofyoJUE.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] Re: time issue
On 30 May 2011 10:15, András Csányi sayusi.a...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, I have a little problem regarding time. After every boot I have to setup my clock because about my machine the current time is +2 hour more. To be honest, this is a little bit annoying. What I did: - According to install guide I have copied the /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/Budapest to /etc/localtime - According to localization guide [1] I have to set up the current timezone in the /etc/conf.d/clock file but this file is missing. I have checked it the original stage-3 pack from Hungarian mirror and I couldn't find there as well. I think this file is removed. So my question is that, what should I do to have the current time automatically (I'm in Hungary/Budapest)? Should I make a new clock file? [1] - http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/guide-localization.xml Thanks for any help in advance! Thank you for your help! This problem is resolved. For the record, I edited the hwclock file, I created the /etc/timezone file and I symlinked the proper file from zoneinfo directory to /etc/localtime, and a ntp daemon was installed, as well. It looks like everything is working fine! -- - - -- Csanyi Andras (Sayusi Ando) -- http://sayusi.hu -- http://facebook.com/andras.csanyi -- Trust in God and keep your gunpowder dry! - Cromwell
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tue, 31 May 2011 10:10:01 +0200, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files: On Mon, 30 May 2011 23:08:08 +0100, David W Noon wrote: You have just touched on an annoyance of unmerge, in that it does not clean up configuration files that have been modified. It removes files that are still in the same state as when the package was emerged, but not those modified by the user. I don't see how user changes make the file more important than would be in its vanilla state. It doesn't remove *any* files that have been modified, Erm ... that's what I wrote, above. [That is, of course, predicated on the assumption that installing Package A will not modify configuration files owned by Package B, and vice-versa: all post-installation modifications are performed by the user.] the reasons systems used to get cluttered with orphaned .la files. The logic is quite simple, if it is not the file portage installed with the package, it should not be uninstalled with the package. Why should that be so? If the user has modified a configuration file after the previous installation and then unmerges the package, a repeat of the configuration changes is all that is required to reinstate it if the package is removed in its entirety. The user might even be daring and take a backup of the file(s) in question. To repeat myself: I do not see a customized configuration file as being any more important than a vanilla one. If I understand a configuration file well enough to customize it once, I remain capable of customizing it again after a reinstall. I should be clear here: a reinstall means from new, with no previous version currently installed and is quite distinct from an upgrade or rebuild. There are times when some sort of --force-remove option to remove both these and files in CONFIG_PROTECTed directories would be useful. Again, what I wrote. I think we largely agree on this issue. -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* dwn...@ntlworld.com (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-user] virtualbox + kernel panic 2.6.38-r2
Anyone having any problems with VirtualBox and kernel panics? I've tried vbox 3 and 4, both with the same behavior. Installing Windows 7 as a guest and either (a) my system will completely freeze (I'm assuming the kernel panicked), or (b) I'm thinking the Linux raid module dies because the system becomes unresponsive (although I can open a terminal, the shell doesn't come up, browser freezes, etc.). The only fix for both of these problems is a hard reboot. I have on idea how to go about troubleshooting this issue. I'd hate to open a ticket with the vbox folks until I have more information. The only thing I've read online that may be applicable is that there have been some issues with kernel panics when you give the guest OS more than 1 processor. It would suck badly if SMP didn't work well on vbox. Thoughts? -james
[gentoo-user] Caching Proxy alternative to Squid?
Hello! I've been having problems with my Squid-equipped Gentoo box: For some sites, Squid just times out. But if I access the sites directly, they appear in my browser. And doing a direct wget from the Squidbox also works. Now I'm not sure whose 'fault' it is, but just in case it's Squid's, I'll experiment with other web proxies. Unfortunately, the selection in portage seems very limited. Oops, Polipo, and 3proxy seem to have gone dormant, and Apache Traffic Server is still Bug#335637 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/335637 ) So, what can I do? Rgds, -- -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/
Re: [gentoo-user] What has Sabayon to do with Gentoo?
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:05:06 Alan Mackenzie wrote: Hi, all. Sabayon Linux is said to be derived from Gentoo. Yet, reading reviews of Sabayon (from www.distrowatch.org), I fail to see any similarity between G and S; S is a binary distribution, doesn't have portage, and doesn't look like having much flexibility. Purely out of curiosity, what is the nature of this derivation? they use the portage tree and a gentoo like /etc. Just for example. AFAIR of course.
[gentoo-user] What has Sabayon to do with Gentoo?
Hi, all. Sabayon Linux is said to be derived from Gentoo. Yet, reading reviews of Sabayon (from www.distrowatch.org), I fail to see any similarity between G and S; S is a binary distribution, doesn't have portage, and doesn't look like having much flexibility. Purely out of curiosity, what is the nature of this derivation? -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
Re: [gentoo-user] What has Sabayon to do with Gentoo?
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:05:06 Alan Mackenzie wrote: Hi, all. Sabayon Linux is said to be derived from Gentoo. Yet, reading reviews of Sabayon (from www.distrowatch.org), I fail to see any similarity between G and S; S is a binary distribution, doesn't have portage, and doesn't look like having much flexibility. Purely out of curiosity, what is the nature of this derivation? they use the portage tree and a gentoo like /etc. Just for example. AFAIR of course. You can think Sabayon as another Gentoo overlay (you can actually install the overlay in your Gentoo installation). It provides binary packages and many other things to help the user, still though you can use emerge and all the features (if not all most) Gentoo has to offer. All in all is a pretty good job.
Re: [gentoo-user] Caching Proxy alternative to Squid?
Am 31.05.2011 19:36, schrieb Pandu Poluan: Hello! I've been having problems with my Squid-equipped Gentoo box: For some sites, Squid just times out. But if I access the sites directly, they appear in my browser. And doing a direct wget from the Squidbox also works. Now I'm not sure whose 'fault' it is, but just in case it's Squid's, I'll experiment with other web proxies. Unfortunately, the selection in portage seems very limited. Oops, Polipo, and 3proxy seem to have gone dormant, and Apache Traffic Server is still Bug#335637 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/335637 ) So, what can I do? Rgds, Well, apache itself with mod_proxy works reasonably well but it doesn't support https and ftp, as far as I remember. Make sure to change the default config. I'll attach my config (/etc/apache2/modules.d/50_mod_proxy.conf). IfModule mod_proxy.c ProxyRequests On # Allow access from the local net only Proxy * Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from 192.168. Allow from 127. /Proxy # Enable/disable the handling of HTTP/1.1 Via: headers. # (Full adds the server version; # Block removes all outgoing Via: headers) # Set to one of: Off | On | Full | Block ProxyVia On # Enable the cache as well # (no caching without CacheRoot) IfModule mod_cache.c IfModule mod_disk_cache.c CacheRoot /var/cache/apache2/proxy CacheEnable disk / # Using many CacheDirLevels makes cache cleanup very slow CacheDirLevels 1 # Using long names can lead to too many files per directory for FS CacheDirLength 2 /IfModule /IfModule /IfModule There is no size limit for apache's cache. For this, you have to execute htcacheclean as a cron job. Hope this helps, Florian Philipp signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Apparently, though unproven, at 17:27 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Mark Knecht did opine thusly: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Alain DIDIERJEAN alain.didierj...@free.fr wrote: Trying to update from kde4.5 to kde4.6 I find that it is easier to unmerge old version :4.5 KDE, then emerge the new version :4.6. Upgrade always seems to be a mess like that. Probably there's no real problem but I think in my recent machines if I've chosen the KDE profile and try something like emerge -Cp kde-meta then there are lots of warning messages about how I'm removing parts of @system. It's unlikely (in my mind anyway) that anything would be removed that stops one from doing the 4.6 emerge, but if one goes this way they should look very carefully at what's getting taken out just to make sure. You must have something badly wrong with your @system. kde-meta depends on: RDEPEND= $(add_kdebase_dep kate) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeadmin-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeartwork-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdebase-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeedu-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdegames-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdegraphics-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdemultimedia-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdenetwork-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeplasma-addons) $(add_kdebase_dep kdetoys-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeutils-meta) accessibility? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdeaccessibility-meta) ) nls? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kde-l10n) ) sdk? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdebindings-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdesdk-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdewebdev-meta) ) semantic-desktop? ( || ( ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdepim-meta '' 4.5.93) ) ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdepim-meta '' 4.4.9) ) ) ) A few extra packages and a lot of other meta packages. emerge -Cp will remove only that one package, it won;t even remove the deps. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] virtualbox + kernel panic 2.6.38-r2
On 2011-05-31 1:31 PM, James wrote: The only thing I've read online that may be applicable is that there have been some issues with kernel panics when you give the guest OS more than 1 processor. It would suck badly if SMP didn't work well on vbox. My understanding is it is a general rule that you never give any VM more than one processor, regardless of which vm hypervisor you are running...
Re: [gentoo-user] What has Sabayon to do with Gentoo?
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 1:18 PM, skiarxon skiar...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:05:06 Alan Mackenzie wrote: Hi, all. Sabayon Linux is said to be derived from Gentoo. Yet, reading reviews of Sabayon (from www.distrowatch.org), I fail to see any similarity between G and S; S is a binary distribution, doesn't have portage, and doesn't look like having much flexibility. Purely out of curiosity, what is the nature of this derivation? they use the portage tree and a gentoo like /etc. Just for example. AFAIR of course. You can think Sabayon as another Gentoo overlay (you can actually install the overlay in your Gentoo installation). It provides binary packages and many other things to help the user, still though you can use emerge and all the features (if not all most) Gentoo has to offer. All in all is a pretty good job. In fact I believe you can use layman to add the sabayon overlay, emerge entropy (Sabayon's binary package manager) and start using it. (I'm sure it's not entirely that straightforward, but that's the executive summary)
[gentoo-user] Re: Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
On 05/30/2011 06:03 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote: Are you using a recent stage3 tarball? If so, I suspect your booting problem has got something to do with this bug: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=368597 That was it, thanks! Nothing to do with the kernel after all. I created /dev/console and added udev to the sysinit level and now it boots right up :) On 2011-05-31, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: However, when I reboot the virtual gentoo guest machine with my new customized kernel, the boot hangs forever after discovering devices and mounting the root partition.ro.
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 08:07:24 Pandu Poluan wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 13:56, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Meh, I clicked 'Send' too fast. *My* suggested solution: Generate an initramfs containing udev. The hands-down easiest way is using genkernel's 'only create an initramfs' switch (sorry I forgot what exactly). good god no, please, anything but genkernel. That thing is an attempt to emulate binary distros which require an initramfs to work properly (for any sane definition of work) as the person building the installer has no idea what hardware the user will have. In Gentoo the user knows exactly what they have so there's no need for a gigantic hardware-detecting workaround at boot time. This needs to be done exactly once throughout the life of your VM. (To the herd of Gentoo graybeards, feel free to CMIIW) Or wait a few days for vapier's (posting under his other name of spanky) sane advice to be implemented. His proposal is the sole voice of reason in that bug thread True. But I was having problem installing 2 servers on top of XenServer. So I cheated and ran 'genkernel initramfs' exactly once. At least I got myself a booting system. :-) When SpanKY's makedev gets stabilized and pushed to baselayout, I'll then happily ditch the genkernel cheat for my next VMs :-) Are you sure that manually creating /dev/console and /dev/null isn't all that is required? The rest of the devices will be created by udev when it runs at boot time. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] virtualbox + kernel panic 2.6.38-r2
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2011-05-31 1:31 PM, James wrote: The only thing I've read online that may be applicable is that there have been some issues with kernel panics when you give the guest OS more than 1 processor. It would suck badly if SMP didn't work well on vbox. My understanding is it is a general rule that you never give any VM more than one processor, regardless of which vm hypervisor you are running... My platform is a Gentoo i7-980 Extreme processor so I have 12 CPUs (6 cores * 2 for hyperthreading) In Virtualbox I'm running both Gentoo and Win 7 VMs, each allocated 4 processors. In Win 7 I have one app that uses everything it can find so when it's running all 4 processors are 100% utilized. In Linux I see the CPU usage at 33%. Win 7 is sluggish when this app is running as it hogs from the system In VMWare Player I'm running Win XP VMs with 2 processors. None of my apps in XP use more than 1 processor. XP itself is quite responsive even when these apps are using 1 of the 2 processors dedicated the the VM. I seldom run more than 1 app in any Windows VM as I don't trust Windows. I've not had any problems with any of these VMs that I'd associate with using multiple cores. And yes, I do own these Windows licenses. VMs keep that money useful until some day some Linux apps come along that do what these do for me in Windows. - Mark
Re: [gentoo-user] virtualbox + kernel panic 2.6.38-r2
On 5/31/2011 12:11 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2011-05-31 1:31 PM, James wrote: The only thing I've read online that may be applicable is that there have been some issues with kernel panics when you give the guest OS more than 1 processor. It would suck badly if SMP didn't work well on vbox. My understanding is it is a general rule that you never give any VM more than one processor, regardless of which vm hypervisor you are running... If SMP in VMs were that much of a problem then EC2 and the rest of the clouds would be useless. I'd go so far as to say if you're not oversubscribing your physical CPUs by handing them out multiple times to your VMs you're leaving half of your infrastructure underutilized. That said vbox has never been completely stable for me in any configuration and I usually reboot my laptop once a week. I am running 4.0.8 with a Gentoo guest (2.6.36-r5) using 2 CPUs. I haven't noticed any changes in stability since making the change to SMP last month. However there have been at least two SMP guest fixes in the 4.x version. kashani
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 17:27 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Mark Knecht did opine thusly: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Alain DIDIERJEAN alain.didierj...@free.fr wrote: Trying to update from kde4.5 to kde4.6 I find that it is easier to unmerge old version :4.5 KDE, then emerge the new version :4.6. Upgrade always seems to be a mess like that. Probably there's no real problem but I think in my recent machines if I've chosen the KDE profile and try something like emerge -Cp kde-meta then there are lots of warning messages about how I'm removing parts of @system. It's unlikely (in my mind anyway) that anything would be removed that stops one from doing the 4.6 emerge, but if one goes this way they should look very carefully at what's getting taken out just to make sure. You must have something badly wrong with your @system. kde-meta depends on: RDEPEND= $(add_kdebase_dep kate) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeadmin-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeartwork-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdebase-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeedu-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdegames-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdegraphics-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdemultimedia-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdenetwork-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeplasma-addons) $(add_kdebase_dep kdetoys-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeutils-meta) accessibility? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdeaccessibility-meta) ) nls? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kde-l10n) ) sdk? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdebindings-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdesdk-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdewebdev-meta) ) semantic-desktop? ( || ( ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdepim-meta '' 4.5.93) ) ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdepim-meta '' 4.4.9) ) ) ) A few extra packages and a lot of other meta packages. emerge -Cp will remove only that one package, it won;t even remove the deps. Does anyone remember the discussion I had about kde packages being in the system set when doing a emerge -e system? If I for example unmerge kde-meta then run --depclean, I bet I would get the error about system packages being removed. It may be because of USE flags but this was what I was concerned about during the last discussion. Having GUI packages, especially KDE, included in the system set, even if because of USE flags, is going to lead to problems at some point. Or maybe I am reading all this wrong? Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
Apparently, though unproven, at 21:27 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Mick did opine thusly: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 08:07:24 Pandu Poluan wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 13:56, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Meh, I clicked 'Send' too fast. *My* suggested solution: Generate an initramfs containing udev. The hands-down easiest way is using genkernel's 'only create an initramfs' switch (sorry I forgot what exactly). good god no, please, anything but genkernel. That thing is an attempt to emulate binary distros which require an initramfs to work properly (for any sane definition of work) as the person building the installer has no idea what hardware the user will have. In Gentoo the user knows exactly what they have so there's no need for a gigantic hardware-detecting workaround at boot time. This needs to be done exactly once throughout the life of your VM. (To the herd of Gentoo graybeards, feel free to CMIIW) Or wait a few days for vapier's (posting under his other name of spanky) sane advice to be implemented. His proposal is the sole voice of reason in that bug thread True. But I was having problem installing 2 servers on top of XenServer. So I cheated and ran 'genkernel initramfs' exactly once. At least I got myself a booting system. :-) When SpanKY's makedev gets stabilized and pushed to baselayout, I'll then happily ditch the genkernel cheat for my next VMs :-) Are you sure that manually creating /dev/console and /dev/null isn't all that is required? The rest of the devices will be created by udev when it runs at boot time. null and console are the absolute irreducible minimum but there's one that can be dispensed with if the correct kernel option is enabled. We don't need everything that makedev traditionally provided (like every block device type known to man, floppys and ancient ptys) but the rest number about ~250 and are useful in single-user mode if udev fails to start. Considering that ~250 devices consumes a teeny-weeny bit of disk space and they are hidden from view normally, I say it's worth it leaving them in. Which is what vapier also says. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
Alan McKinnon wrote: Considering that ~250 devices consumes a teeny-weeny bit of disk space and they are hidden from view normally, I say it's worth it leaving them in. Which is what vapier also says. +1 They are tiny plus when devfs mounts, they aren't visible anymore if I recall correctly. Doesn't devfs mount on top of them? Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
tisdagen den 31 maj 2011 22:00:28 skrev Dale: Does anyone remember the discussion I had about kde packages being in the system set when doing a emerge -e system? If I for example unmerge kde-meta then run --depclean, I bet I would get the error about system packages being removed. It may be because of USE flags but this was what I was concerned about during the last discussion. Having GUI packages, especially KDE, included in the system set, even if because of USE flags, is going to lead to problems at some point. Or maybe I am reading all this wrong? Dale I assume you have kde enabled on sys-auth/polkit, that pulls in sys- auth/polkit-kde-agent and sys-auth/polkit-kde. Thats all the qt-* and kdelibs packages.
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
Apparently, though unproven, at 22:12 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Dale did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon wrote: Considering that ~250 devices consumes a teeny-weeny bit of disk space and they are hidden from view normally, I say it's worth it leaving them in. Which is what vapier also says. +1 They are tiny plus when devfs mounts, they aren't visible anymore if I recall correctly. Doesn't devfs mount on top of them? Well that's what hidden from view normally evaluates to. But it's not devfs - that was an abomination that should never have been suffered to live. It's mere existence offended GregKH so much that he whipped up the beginnings of udev so that he might never see devfs ever again It's udev and is normally mounted on a tmpfs -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:26:43 David W Noon wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2011 10:10:01 +0200, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files: On Mon, 30 May 2011 23:08:08 +0100, David W Noon wrote: You have just touched on an annoyance of unmerge, in that it does not clean up configuration files that have been modified. It removes files that are still in the same state as when the package was emerged, but not those modified by the user. I don't see how user changes make the file more important than would be in its vanilla state. It doesn't remove *any* files that have been modified, Erm ... that's what I wrote, above. [That is, of course, predicated on the assumption that installing Package A will not modify configuration files owned by Package B, and vice-versa: all post-installation modifications are performed by the user.] the reasons systems used to get cluttered with orphaned .la files. The logic is quite simple, if it is not the file portage installed with the package, it should not be uninstalled with the package. Why should that be so? If the user has modified a configuration file after the previous installation and then unmerges the package, a repeat of the configuration changes is all that is required to reinstate it if the package is removed in its entirety. The user might even be daring and take a backup of the file(s) in question. It seems that we have a different appreciation of the user's value of time in editing config files ... To repeat myself: I do not see a customized configuration file as being any more important than a vanilla one. If I understand a configuration file well enough to customize it once, I remain capable of customizing it again after a reinstall. I would *not* want to have to reconfigure sendmail, apache, mrtg, or umpteen other files from scratch if you don't mind. I probably can't remember what I was doing 3 years ago (or whenever I might have edited them) and the whole ecosystem of keeping things going may be quite fragile to cope with portage doing away with files I had modified, *without* asking me! Yes, I know there are back ups and rsync can be ran so as to not delete old config file back ups, but I find the current set up most convenient and sensible. After all we're talking about a few extra KB for a small number of config files, hardly a space saver these days. However, if we're talking of an additional option for those who want to use it to remove orphan config files, but which offers enough warnings to wake up the user, then I wouldn't of course object to that as long as it was not made the default setting. Personally, unless there is mass demand for such a feature, I think that qfile -o is good enough for this purpose. Anyway, just my 2c's. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] setting locale
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 16:44:25 William Hubbs wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 07:19:16AM -0400, David Relson wrote: Why not use echo ... ?? Since the does an append, the original file contents are still available for reference. Since the added line is at the end of the file, the new value will be used instead of the old value. In this case though, to set the locale properly, you should set LANG or LC_CTYPE and not set any of the other LC_* variables. If you are setting the other variables, those settings should be removed. Unless you want some of them to be different? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 21:02:46 Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 21:27 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Mick did opine thusly: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 08:07:24 Pandu Poluan wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 13:56, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Pandu Poluan pa...@poluan.info wrote: Meh, I clicked 'Send' too fast. *My* suggested solution: Generate an initramfs containing udev. The hands-down easiest way is using genkernel's 'only create an initramfs' switch (sorry I forgot what exactly). good god no, please, anything but genkernel. That thing is an attempt to emulate binary distros which require an initramfs to work properly (for any sane definition of work) as the person building the installer has no idea what hardware the user will have. In Gentoo the user knows exactly what they have so there's no need for a gigantic hardware-detecting workaround at boot time. This needs to be done exactly once throughout the life of your VM. (To the herd of Gentoo graybeards, feel free to CMIIW) Or wait a few days for vapier's (posting under his other name of spanky) sane advice to be implemented. His proposal is the sole voice of reason in that bug thread True. But I was having problem installing 2 servers on top of XenServer. So I cheated and ran 'genkernel initramfs' exactly once. At least I got myself a booting system. :-) When SpanKY's makedev gets stabilized and pushed to baselayout, I'll then happily ditch the genkernel cheat for my next VMs :-) Are you sure that manually creating /dev/console and /dev/null isn't all that is required? The rest of the devices will be created by udev when it runs at boot time. null and console are the absolute irreducible minimum but there's one that can be dispensed with if the correct kernel option is enabled. We don't need everything that makedev traditionally provided (like every block device type known to man, floppys and ancient ptys) but the rest number about ~250 and are useful in single-user mode if udev fails to start. Considering that ~250 devices consumes a teeny-weeny bit of disk space and they are hidden from view normally, I say it's worth it leaving them in. Which is what vapier also says. I see. In my head it is as if we're going against the udev principle of populating required device nodes. If udev does not start, isn't it time to head for the nearest LiveCD, or must we ensure that every breakage is fixable in single-user mode? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Apparently, though unproven, at 22:00 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Dale did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 17:27 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Mark Knecht did opine thusly: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Alain DIDIERJEAN alain.didierj...@free.fr wrote: Trying to update from kde4.5 to kde4.6 I find that it is easier to unmerge old version :4.5 KDE, then emerge the new version :4.6. Upgrade always seems to be a mess like that. Probably there's no real problem but I think in my recent machines if I've chosen the KDE profile and try something like emerge -Cp kde-meta then there are lots of warning messages about how I'm removing parts of @system. It's unlikely (in my mind anyway) that anything would be removed that stops one from doing the 4.6 emerge, but if one goes this way they should look very carefully at what's getting taken out just to make sure. You must have something badly wrong with your @system. kde-meta depends on: RDEPEND= $(add_kdebase_dep kate) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeadmin-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeartwork-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdebase-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeedu-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdegames-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdegraphics-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdemultimedia-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdenetwork-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeplasma-addons) $(add_kdebase_dep kdetoys-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdeutils-meta) accessibility? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdeaccessibility-meta) ) nls? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kde-l10n) ) sdk? ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdebindings-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdesdk-meta) $(add_kdebase_dep kdewebdev-meta) ) semantic-desktop? ( || ( ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdepim-meta '' 4.5.93) ) ( $(add_kdebase_dep kdepim-meta '' 4.4.9) ) ) ) A few extra packages and a lot of other meta packages. emerge -Cp will remove only that one package, it won;t even remove the deps. Does anyone remember the discussion I had about kde packages being in the system set when doing a emerge -e system? If I for example unmerge kde-meta then run --depclean, I bet I would get the error about system packages being removed. It may be because of USE flags but this was what I was concerned about during the last discussion. Having GUI packages, especially KDE, included in the system set, even if because of USE flags, is going to lead to problems at some point. Or maybe I am reading all this wrong? You understand it wrong. system (or @system for portage versions that support sets) consists of the minimum collection of packages for a gentoo system to work at all. It is wholly inappropriate for even a profile to add kde to @system - even the kde profiles. All those do is set USE flags and an environment suitable for KDE to be install, the profile does not cause KDE to be install. You still need to emerge kde yourself. Proof: The contents of @system are defined by the various files called packages in the profile dir. But: nazgul profiles # find . -name packages | xargs grep kde nazgul profiles # There is nothing you can do with USE flags that will cause stuff to be added to @system. That is not how it works. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Nils Larsson wrote: tisdagen den 31 maj 2011 22:00:28 skrev Dale: Does anyone remember the discussion I had about kde packages being in the system set when doing a emerge -e system? If I for example unmerge kde-meta then run --depclean, I bet I would get the error about system packages being removed. It may be because of USE flags but this was what I was concerned about during the last discussion. Having GUI packages, especially KDE, included in the system set, even if because of USE flags, is going to lead to problems at some point. Or maybe I am reading all this wrong? Dale I assume you have kde enabled on sys-auth/polkit, that pulls in sys- auth/polkit-kde-agent and sys-auth/polkit-kde. Thats all the qt-* and kdelibs packages. My point and the previous discussion was about this: root@fireball / # emerge -ep @system | grep kde [ebuild R ~] kde-base/kde-env-4.6.3 [ebuild R ~] kde-base/oxygen-icons-4.6.3-r1 [ebuild R ~] kde-base/kdelibs-4.6.3-r1 [ebuild R] sys-auth/polkit-kde-agent-0.99.0 [ebuild R ~] kde-base/nepomuk-4.6.3 [ebuild R ~] kde-base/kdesu-4.6.3 [ebuild R ~] kde-base/kfmclient-4.6.3 [ebuild R ~] kde-base/khelpcenter-4.6.3 [ebuild R] kde-misc/polkit-kde-kcmodules-0.98_pre20101127 root@fireball / # It's more than polkit that gets pulled in. It is because of USE flags but they are still there. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 22:12 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Dale did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon wrote: Considering that ~250 devices consumes a teeny-weeny bit of disk space and they are hidden from view normally, I say it's worth it leaving them in. Which is what vapier also says. +1 They are tiny plus when devfs mounts, they aren't visible anymore if I recall correctly. Doesn't devfs mount on top of them? Well that's what hidden from view normally evaluates to. But it's not devfs - that was an abomination that should never have been suffered to live. It's mere existence offended GregKH so much that he whipped up the beginnings of udev so that he might never see devfs ever again It's udev and is normally mounted on a tmpfs Correct. I was thinking about the old way. Still mounted on top of and hidden as you say. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Apparently, though unproven, at 22:20 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Nils Larsson did opine thusly: tisdagen den 31 maj 2011 22:00:28 skrev Dale: Does anyone remember the discussion I had about kde packages being in the system set when doing a emerge -e system? If I for example unmerge kde-meta then run --depclean, I bet I would get the error about system packages being removed. It may be because of USE flags but this was what I was concerned about during the last discussion. Having GUI packages, especially KDE, included in the system set, even if because of USE flags, is going to lead to problems at some point. Or maybe I am reading all this wrong? Dale I assume you have kde enabled on sys-auth/polkit, that pulls in sys- auth/polkit-kde-agent and sys-auth/polkit-kde. Thats all the qt-* and kdelibs packages. It appears I was wrong after all. Manners dictates that apologies to Dale are in order. Sorry Dale. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 22:20 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Nils Larsson did opine thusly: tisdagen den 31 maj 2011 22:00:28 skrev Dale: Does anyone remember the discussion I had about kde packages being in the system set when doing a emerge -e system? If I for example unmerge kde-meta then run --depclean, I bet I would get the error about system packages being removed. It may be because of USE flags but this was what I was concerned about during the last discussion. Having GUI packages, especially KDE, included in the system set, even if because of USE flags, is going to lead to problems at some point. Or maybe I am reading all this wrong? Dale I assume you have kde enabled on sys-auth/polkit, that pulls in sys- auth/polkit-kde-agent and sys-auth/polkit-kde. Thats all the qt-* and kdelibs packages. It appears I was wrong after all. Manners dictates that apologies to Dale are in order. Sorry Dale. No need. I'm more worried about the heat over here. It's going to be 100F tomorrow. My poor garden is starting to cook the food as well as grow it. O_O I just need to explain it better from now on. ;-) Now, I bet there is no way to get KDE stuff out of that either. I guess one could disable the flags that pull them in but what would that take away from KDE? Then again, doesn't KDE require polkit now? If so, that can't be removed not without some teeth pulling at least. Those pesky USE flags. lol sighs Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Apparently, though unproven, at 23:55 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Dale did opine thusly: It appears I was wrong after all. Manners dictates that apologies to Dale are in order. Sorry Dale. No need. I'm more worried about the heat over here. It's going to be 100F tomorrow. My poor garden is starting to cook the food as well as grow it. O_O I just need to explain it better from now on. ;-) You live down Louisiana/New Orleans way right? Sticking hot in summer. Fine bourbon though. And blues, don't forget the blues. Or you could come over to Johannesburg and luxuriate in our wonderful high- altitude winters. Tonight is predicted to be -2 deg C -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 23:55 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Dale did opine thusly: It appears I was wrong after all. Manners dictates that apologies to Dale are in order. Sorry Dale. No need. I'm more worried about the heat over here. It's going to be 100F tomorrow. My poor garden is starting to cook the food as well as grow it. O_O I just need to explain it better from now on. ;-) You live down Louisiana/New Orleans way right? Sticking hot in summer. Fine bourbon though. And blues, don't forget the blues. Or you could come over to Johannesburg and luxuriate in our wonderful high- altitude winters. Tonight is predicted to be -2 deg C I live in Mississippi. Never been to New Orleans but bet it about the same tho. It's sticky and hot plus the sun cooks you pretty good, like being on broil in a oven. I'm just glad I am not a tomato plant out in this. I got some garden pics on here: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1152574063 I think they are public. If not, write on my wall or post here and I'll change it. Maybe my ex isn't still stalking me. :/ Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tue, 31 May 2011 22:40:01 +0200, Mick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:26:43 David W Noon wrote: [snip] To repeat myself: I do not see a customized configuration file as being any more important than a vanilla one. If I understand a configuration file well enough to customize it once, I remain capable of customizing it again after a reinstall. I would *not* want to have to reconfigure sendmail, apache, mrtg, or umpteen other files from scratch if you don't mind. In that case, do not unmerge them. Just upgrade as needed. Remember that I am writing purely about *unmerged* packages. In the case of a rebuild or upgrade, customizations would be preserved just as they are now. -- Regards, Dave [RLU #314465] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* dwn...@ntlworld.com (David W Noon) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
David W Noon wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2011 22:40:01 +0200, Mick wrote about Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:26:43 David W Noon wrote: [snip] To repeat myself: I do not see a customized configuration file as being any more important than a vanilla one. If I understand a configuration file well enough to customize it once, I remain capable of customizing it again after a reinstall. I would *not* want to have to reconfigure sendmail, apache, mrtg, or umpteen other files from scratch if you don't mind. In that case, do not unmerge them. Just upgrade as needed. Remember that I am writing purely about *unmerged* packages. In the case of a rebuild or upgrade, customizations would be preserved just as they are now. I have in the past unmerged a package, checked to make sure it is all gone and then emerged it again. I think this type of situation is what people are talking about. Since I have done this myself, I wouldn't want the config files to be deleted and others seem to be talking about the same thing. That's my take on it at least. It should be a option but not something that is done by default. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tue, 31 May 2011 23:43:59 +0100, David W Noon wrote: Remember that I am writing purely about *unmerged* packages. In the case of a rebuild or upgrade, customizations would be preserved just as they are now. Sometimes it is necessary to unmerge a package before emerging a newer version, either manually or by portage, to resolve blockers. Making unmerge remove all config files would cause breakage in such a case. There's a reason why the CONFIG_PROTECT variable is so named. -- Neil Bothwick Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Tue, 31 May 2011 17:26:43 +0100, David W Noon wrote: You have just touched on an annoyance of unmerge, in that it does not clean up configuration files that have been modified. It removes files that are still in the same state as when the package was emerged, but not those modified by the user. I don't see how user changes make the file more important than would be in its vanilla state. It doesn't remove *any* files that have been modified, Erm ... that's what I wrote, above. No it's not. You were referring to a special case of the general statement I made. [That is, of course, predicated on the assumption that installing Package A will not modify configuration files owned by Package B, and vice-versa: all post-installation modifications are performed by the user.] That is valid, provide collision-protect is included in FEATURES. the reasons systems used to get cluttered with orphaned .la files. The logic is quite simple, if it is not the file portage installed with the package, it should not be uninstalled with the package. Why should that be so? It's quite simple logic, whether or not you agree with it. If a file is modified, it is no longer the file portage installed, so portage does not uninstall it. If anything, the problem is that the logic used by portage is too simple. To repeat myself: I do not see a customized configuration file as being any more important than a vanilla one. A customised file contains an investment of the user's time, a generic file does not. That investment may be small or great, but it is not for portage to determine that value and remove the file without the user's consent. I should be clear here: a reinstall means from new, with no previous version currently installed and is quite distinct from an upgrade or rebuild. Not as distinct as you may think. Portage updates a package by first installing the new version then unmerging the old one. As it uses checksums and timestamps to determine ownership of a file, this is safe as it will not remove files from the new version that overwrote identically-named files from the old package. There are times when some sort of --force-remove option to remove both these and files in CONFIG_PROTECTed directories would be useful. Again, what I wrote. I think we largely agree on this issue. We agree on the usefulness of a purge-like option but not on the desirability or otherwise of the current default behaviour -- Neil Bothwick A friend in need may turn out to be a nuisance. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Apparently, though unproven, at 00:35 on Wednesday 01 June 2011, Dale did opine thusly: Alan McKinnon wrote: Apparently, though unproven, at 23:55 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Dale did opine thusly: It appears I was wrong after all. Manners dictates that apologies to Dale are in order. Sorry Dale. No need. I'm more worried about the heat over here. It's going to be 100F tomorrow. My poor garden is starting to cook the food as well as grow it. O_O I just need to explain it better from now on. ;-) You live down Louisiana/New Orleans way right? Sticking hot in summer. Fine bourbon though. And blues, don't forget the blues. Or you could come over to Johannesburg and luxuriate in our wonderful high- altitude winters. Tonight is predicted to be -2 deg C I live in Mississippi. Never been to New Orleans but bet it about the same tho. It's sticky and hot plus the sun cooks you pretty good, like being on broil in a oven. I'm just glad I am not a tomato plant out in this. I got some garden pics on here: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1152574063 I think they are public. If not, write on my wall or post here and I'll change it. Maybe my ex isn't still stalking me. :/ So that's what you look like :-) I had a ... very different ... mental picture (also a complete fiction). There's no public photos on your page though :-( And what's that gigantic gate over the river behind you in the profile pic? Looks a bit like the sea wall gates on the Thames. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
On Wednesday 01 June 2011 00:14:04 Neil Bothwick wrote: It's quite simple logic... If a file is modified, it is no longer the file portage installed, so portage does not uninstall it. If anything, the problem is that the logic used by portage is too simple. I don't think it's too simple. It seems exactly right for the task to me: clear, predictable and easily understood. A customised file contains an investment of the user's time, a generic file does not. That investment may be small or great, but it is not for portage to determine that value and remove the file without the user's consent. Personally, I'd be livid if portage were to remove my carefully crafted work from time immemorial, without so much as a by-your-leave. Anyone who wants to delete his own work is free to do so, but the rest of us ought not to be required to suffer it. -- Rgds Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
On Wednesday 01 June 2011 00:30:37 Alan McKinnon wrote: And what's that gigantic gate over the river behind you in the profile pic? Looks a bit like the sea wall gates on the Thames. A good deal less elegant though :) -- Rgds Peter
Re: [gentoo-user] Cleaning redundant configuration files
Neil Bothwick wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2011 23:43:59 +0100, David W Noon wrote: Remember that I am writing purely about *unmerged* packages. In the case of a rebuild or upgrade, customizations would be preserved just as they are now. Sometimes it is necessary to unmerge a package before emerging a newer version, either manually or by portage, to resolve blockers. Making unmerge remove all config files would cause breakage in such a case. There's a reason why the CONFIG_PROTECT variable is so named. I had thought of something like that being done manually but didn't think of portage doing it itself. That's a better reason than mine even tho it does the same thing. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] kde update
Alan McKinnon wrote: So that's what you look like :-) I had a ... very different ... mental picture (also a complete fiction). There's no public photos on your page though :-( And what's that gigantic gate over the river behind you in the profile pic? Looks a bit like the sea wall gates on the Thames. You thought I was some old geezer with gray hair huh? lol Hmmm, I do have some of those tho. It's not as funny now. :-( The thing behind me is a lock and dam. The locks are on the other side so you can't see those. Tthat is where boats and barges go through to navigate the river. The part behind me is the dam with gates. It's sort of like flood control I guess. When it rains a lot, they open them up wide. There is a large amount of water going through there at times. Sometimes it is so much they won't let anyone get close to it. People can fish there tho. You just loose a lot of bait in those huge rocks. I made some of the pictures public now. Try it again and see if you can see more. Mostly me, puter stuff and my garden. Yea, I live in the sticks. The puter pics are of the new rig I built a while back and am currently typing on. That's my Gentoo rig. Folks that have been on here a while know I just got DSL a year or so ago. I was on dial-up before that. It took 2 to 3 days just to download the new KDE stuff. Let's not talk about downloading the CD's and such. Awww heck, let's do. That takes about a week to get if it is not to big. A full CD takes about a week and a half at times. DSL is MUCHO better. lol If you want to add me as a friend on there, let me know you are from here. I don't add just anybody. Keeps the spam down. lol Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Caching Proxy alternative to Squid?
I've been having problems with my Squid-equipped Gentoo box: For some sites, Squid just times out. But if I access the sites directly, they appear in my browser. And doing a direct wget from the Squidbox also works. Now I'm not sure whose 'fault' it is, but just in case it's Squid's, I'll experiment with other web proxies. No problems with squid here - why not try troubleshooting? - which version of squid? if arch, have you tried ~arch? - what does the access and error logs say about the sites that fail?
[gentoo-user] unable to find xcb-{aux, event, atom}
I get the following error several times when trying to emerge gnome-panel on oldlap, an ~x86 gentoo. CCLD panel-test-applets /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lxcb-aux /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lxcb-event /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lxcb-atom collect2: ld returned 1 exit status oldlap ~ # locate xcb-aux /usr/lib/pkgconfig/xcb-aux.pc oldlap ~ # On ajglap, which is ~amd64, gnome panel is fine and ajglap gottlieb # locate xcb-aux /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/xcb-aux.pc ajglap gottlieb # which seems to me to be the same as for oldlap except for the 64 vs 32 difference expected for ~amd64 vs ~x86. Any suggestions would be appreciated. thanks, allan
Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone running a gentoo guest on virtualbox?
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 03:35, Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 21:02:46 Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 21:27 on Tuesday 31 May 2011, Mick did
opine
thusly:
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 08:07:24 Pandu Poluan wrote:
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 13:56, Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
- 8 - massive snippage - 8 -
When SpanKY's makedev gets stabilized and pushed to baselayout, I'll
then happily ditch the genkernel cheat for my next VMs :-)
Are you sure that manually creating /dev/console and /dev/null isn't all
that is required? The rest of the devices will be created by udev when
it runs at boot time.
Most probably so. But at that point, I was pressed for time. Had the
system need only /dev/{console,null} then all will be well. If not?
Then another cycle of LiveCD-mount-mknod-restart.
Much faster to just `genkernel initramfs` while waiting for the snafus
to be fixed
(Well, that, and I'm lazy)
null and console are the absolute irreducible minimum but there's one that
can be dispensed with if the correct kernel option is enabled.
We don't need everything that makedev traditionally provided (like every
block device type known to man, floppys and ancient ptys) but the rest
number about ~250 and are useful in single-user mode if udev fails to
start.
Considering that ~250 devices consumes a teeny-weeny bit of disk space and
they are hidden from view normally, I say it's worth it leaving them in.
Which is what vapier also says.
Agree.
I see. In my head it is as if we're going against the udev principle of
populating required device nodes. If udev does not start, isn't it time to
head for the nearest LiveCD, or must we ensure that every breakage is fixable
in single-user mode?
There are cases for each, but I personally prefer going single-user.
Especially when working on virtualized servers.
Rgds,
--
Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~
Visit my Blog: http://pepoluan.posterous.com
Re: [gentoo-user] virtualbox + kernel panic 2.6.38-r2
On 05/31/2011 01:31 PM, James wrote: Anyone having any problems with VirtualBox and kernel panics? I've tried vbox 3 and 4, both with the same behavior. Installing Windows 7 as a guest and either (a) my system will completely freeze (I'm assuming the kernel panicked), or (b) I'm thinking the Linux raid module dies because the system becomes unresponsive (although I can open a terminal, the shell doesn't come up, browser freezes, etc.). The only fix for both of these problems is a hard reboot. I have on idea how to go about troubleshooting this issue. I'd hate to open a ticket with the vbox folks until I have more information. The only thing I've read online that may be applicable is that there have been some issues with kernel panics when you give the guest OS more than 1 processor. It would suck badly if SMP didn't work well on vbox. Thoughts? -james I am running vbox 4.0.8 on - emerge --info Portage 2.1.9.42 (default/linux/amd64/10.0, gcc-4.4.5, libc-0-r0, 2.6.38-gentoo-r6 x86_64) with only one Win7 VM on a dual core laptop. It works fine and I use CAD software that only runs on Windows. What does your VBox.log say? -- Valmor
Re: [gentoo-user] What has Sabayon to do with Gentoo?
Hi. Maybe it offtop, but are you know about yet another gentoo-based distro Calculate? http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=calculate On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Paul Hartman paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 1:18 PM, skiarxon skiar...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com wrote: On Tuesday 31 May 2011 17:05:06 Alan Mackenzie wrote: Hi, all. Sabayon Linux is said to be derived from Gentoo. Yet, reading reviews of Sabayon (from www.distrowatch.org), I fail to see any similarity between G and S; S is a binary distribution, doesn't have portage, and doesn't look like having much flexibility. Purely out of curiosity, what is the nature of this derivation? they use the portage tree and a gentoo like /etc. Just for example. AFAIR of course. You can think Sabayon as another Gentoo overlay (you can actually install the overlay in your Gentoo installation). It provides binary packages and many other things to help the user, still though you can use emerge and all the features (if not all most) Gentoo has to offer. All in all is a pretty good job. In fact I believe you can use layman to add the sabayon overlay, emerge entropy (Sabayon's binary package manager) and start using it. (I'm sure it's not entirely that straightforward, but that's the executive summary) -- brgds Maxim
Re: [gentoo-user] virtualbox + kernel panic 2.6.38-r2
On Tuesday 31 May 2011 20:55:08 Mark Knecht wrote: On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote: On 2011-05-31 1:31 PM, James wrote: The only thing I've read online that may be applicable is that there have been some issues with kernel panics when you give the guest OS more than 1 processor. It would suck badly if SMP didn't work well on vbox. My understanding is it is a general rule that you never give any VM more than one processor, regardless of which vm hypervisor you are running... My platform is a Gentoo i7-980 Extreme processor so I have 12 CPUs (6 cores * 2 for hyperthreading) In Virtualbox I'm running both Gentoo and Win 7 VMs, each allocated 4 processors. In Win 7 I have one app that uses everything it can find so when it's running all 4 processors are 100% utilized. In Linux I see the CPU usage at 33%. Win 7 is sluggish when this app is running as it hogs from the system In VMWare Player I'm running Win XP VMs with 2 processors. None of my apps in XP use more than 1 processor. XP itself is quite responsive even when these apps are using 1 of the 2 processors dedicated the the VM. I seldom run more than 1 app in any Windows VM as I don't trust Windows. I've not had any problems with any of these VMs that I'd associate with using multiple cores. And yes, I do own these Windows licenses. VMs keep that money useful until some day some Linux apps come along that do what these do for me in Windows. A bit OT I guess, but what apps are you using that do not have a Linux alternative Mark? Answer off list if you wish so we do not hijack the thread. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] unable to find xcb-{aux, event, atom}
On Wednesday 01 Jun 2011 05:00:08 Allan Gottlieb wrote: I get the following error several times when trying to emerge gnome-panel on oldlap, an ~x86 gentoo. CCLD panel-test-applets /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lxcb-aux /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lxcb-event /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lxcb-atom collect2: ld returned 1 exit status oldlap ~ # locate xcb-aux /usr/lib/pkgconfig/xcb-aux.pc oldlap ~ # I seem to have more here, on a stable amd64: $ locate xcb-aux /usr/lib64/libxcb-aux.a /usr/lib64/libxcb-aux.la /usr/lib64/libxcb-aux.so /usr/lib64/libxcb-aux.so.0 /usr/lib64/libxcb-aux.so.0.0.0 /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/xcb-aux.pc $ locate xcb-event /usr/lib64/libxcb-event.a /usr/lib64/libxcb-event.la /usr/lib64/libxcb-event.so /usr/lib64/libxcb-event.so.1 /usr/lib64/libxcb-event.so.1.0.0 /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/xcb-event.pc $ locate xcb-atom /usr/lib64/libxcb-atom.a /usr/lib64/libxcb-atom.la /usr/lib64/libxcb-atom.so /usr/lib64/libxcb-atom.so.1 /usr/lib64/libxcb-atom.so.1.0.0 /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/xcb-atom.pc /usr/portage/media-sound/pulseaudio/files/pulseaudio-0.9.22-xcb-atom-2.patch /usr/portage/media-sound/pulseaudio/files/pulseaudio-0.9.22-xcb-atom.patch -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
