Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Dale wrote: > R0b0t1 wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Dale wrote: >>> R0b0t1 wrote: Hello List, This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if not closely monitored. If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? Cheers, R0b0t1 >>> >>> Have you checked to see what in Firefox is using that memory? >>> about:memory Then click on Verbose and then Measure. In the past, I >>> have found websites that are just awful at loading everything Firefox >>> has and usually for no good reason. It's one reason I use adblock, with >>> some custom blocking not related to ads, and script blocking tools as >>> well. I can give those memory hungry things a toss in the trash before >>> they even load. >>> >>> Maybe that will help. Of course, it could be just Firefox being >>> Firefox. I have seen mine use 2GBs in the past but never that much. :/ >>> >>> Hope that leads to a clue. >>> >> It's a good tip, but the report seems to be a bit optimistic. Firefox >> claims there are 5 processes using ~500MB each, yet if I close Firefox >> 10G is suddenly free. Regardless of whether or not Firefox thinks it >> is using the memory, the kernel thinks it is, because OOM killer >> triggers. >> >> It may or may not be related to certain webpages, I can't especially tell. >> >> Cheers, >> R0b0t1 >> >> > > I'm stuck on Firefox 56 at the moment, addon issues. Anyway, I've had > Firefox, and Seamonkey, to become quite the memory hog before too. > Sometimes the memory things works but it's hard to grasp at times. > Other times, it just provides no help at all. I was hopeful that it > would point out a particular addon or website for you. > > I run multiple profiles here because I have to be logged into the same > site but as different users. Sometimes the best thing to do is > restart. I have found that some sites take up a chunk of memory but > when I close all the tabs for that site, it doesn't seem to release that > memory until I restart Firefox. I don't know if it is the website or > Firefox because sometimes it seems to work as it should and sometimes > not, even with the same site. > > It seems that any web browser that has a lot of bells and whistles is > just going to be a memory hog. I have to admit tho, 10GBs is > excessive. That would make me cringe a bit too. > > Maybe the next update will fix it??? > Right, restarting Firefox is a solution, but not the best. I hope they roll out the compartmentalized profiles soon.
Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 10:34 PM, wrote: > On 02/17 09:55, R0b0t1 wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Dale wrote: >> > R0b0t1 wrote: >> >> Hello List, >> >> >> >> This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read >> >> that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are >> >> unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if >> >> not closely monitored. >> >> >> >> If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> R0b0t1 >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > Have you checked to see what in Firefox is using that memory? >> > about:memory Then click on Verbose and then Measure. In the past, I >> > have found websites that are just awful at loading everything Firefox >> > has and usually for no good reason. It's one reason I use adblock, with >> > some custom blocking not related to ads, and script blocking tools as >> > well. I can give those memory hungry things a toss in the trash before >> > they even load. >> > >> > Maybe that will help. Of course, it could be just Firefox being >> > Firefox. I have seen mine use 2GBs in the past but never that much. :/ >> > >> > Hope that leads to a clue. >> > >> >> It's a good tip, but the report seems to be a bit optimistic. Firefox >> claims there are 5 processes using ~500MB each, yet if I close Firefox >> 10G is suddenly free. Regardless of whether or not Firefox thinks it >> is using the memory, the kernel thinks it is, because OOM killer >> triggers. >> >> It may or may not be related to certain webpages, I can't especially tell. >> >> Cheers, >> R0b0t1 >> > > Hi, > > try 'uBlock origin' and 'uMatrix' for a more specific block. You can > even block certain elements of a webpage by simply clicking on > them. Dont use uBlock (that one without the 'origin' in its name), > since as far as I know it is no longer developed. > Both do a good job for keeping your data yours, too. > > HTH! > Cheers > Meino > I do happen to have uBlock Origin.
Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
R0b0t1 wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Dale wrote: >> R0b0t1 wrote: >>> Hello List, >>> >>> This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read >>> that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are >>> unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if >>> not closely monitored. >>> >>> If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> R0b0t1 >>> >>> >> >> Have you checked to see what in Firefox is using that memory? >> about:memory Then click on Verbose and then Measure. In the past, I >> have found websites that are just awful at loading everything Firefox >> has and usually for no good reason. It's one reason I use adblock, with >> some custom blocking not related to ads, and script blocking tools as >> well. I can give those memory hungry things a toss in the trash before >> they even load. >> >> Maybe that will help. Of course, it could be just Firefox being >> Firefox. I have seen mine use 2GBs in the past but never that much. :/ >> >> Hope that leads to a clue. >> > It's a good tip, but the report seems to be a bit optimistic. Firefox > claims there are 5 processes using ~500MB each, yet if I close Firefox > 10G is suddenly free. Regardless of whether or not Firefox thinks it > is using the memory, the kernel thinks it is, because OOM killer > triggers. > > It may or may not be related to certain webpages, I can't especially tell. > > Cheers, > R0b0t1 > > I'm stuck on Firefox 56 at the moment, addon issues. Anyway, I've had Firefox, and Seamonkey, to become quite the memory hog before too. Sometimes the memory things works but it's hard to grasp at times. Other times, it just provides no help at all. I was hopeful that it would point out a particular addon or website for you. I run multiple profiles here because I have to be logged into the same site but as different users. Sometimes the best thing to do is restart. I have found that some sites take up a chunk of memory but when I close all the tabs for that site, it doesn't seem to release that memory until I restart Firefox. I don't know if it is the website or Firefox because sometimes it seems to work as it should and sometimes not, even with the same site. It seems that any web browser that has a lot of bells and whistles is just going to be a memory hog. I have to admit tho, 10GBs is excessive. That would make me cringe a bit too. Maybe the next update will fix it??? Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
On 02/17 09:55, R0b0t1 wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Dale wrote: > > R0b0t1 wrote: > >> Hello List, > >> > >> This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read > >> that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are > >> unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if > >> not closely monitored. > >> > >> If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> R0b0t1 > >> > >> > > > > > > Have you checked to see what in Firefox is using that memory? > > about:memory Then click on Verbose and then Measure. In the past, I > > have found websites that are just awful at loading everything Firefox > > has and usually for no good reason. It's one reason I use adblock, with > > some custom blocking not related to ads, and script blocking tools as > > well. I can give those memory hungry things a toss in the trash before > > they even load. > > > > Maybe that will help. Of course, it could be just Firefox being > > Firefox. I have seen mine use 2GBs in the past but never that much. :/ > > > > Hope that leads to a clue. > > > > It's a good tip, but the report seems to be a bit optimistic. Firefox > claims there are 5 processes using ~500MB each, yet if I close Firefox > 10G is suddenly free. Regardless of whether or not Firefox thinks it > is using the memory, the kernel thinks it is, because OOM killer > triggers. > > It may or may not be related to certain webpages, I can't especially tell. > > Cheers, > R0b0t1 > Hi, try 'uBlock origin' and 'uMatrix' for a more specific block. You can even block certain elements of a webpage by simply clicking on them. Dont use uBlock (that one without the 'origin' in its name), since as far as I know it is no longer developed. Both do a good job for keeping your data yours, too. HTH! Cheers Meino
Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
On 2018.02.17 21:14, Neil Bothwick wrote: I no longer use Gnucash, having switched to KMyMoney a few years ago. Now that's just jumped a major version and I had to mask it because of missing features... so much for progress. What missing features? There are some bugs in KMM 5.0, but I don't know of anything totally missing (that was present in 4.x) If you found a bug or regression not already reported, please do report it.
Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 9:11 PM, Dale wrote: > R0b0t1 wrote: >> Hello List, >> >> This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read >> that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are >> unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if >> not closely monitored. >> >> If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? >> >> Cheers, >> R0b0t1 >> >> > > > Have you checked to see what in Firefox is using that memory? > about:memory Then click on Verbose and then Measure. In the past, I > have found websites that are just awful at loading everything Firefox > has and usually for no good reason. It's one reason I use adblock, with > some custom blocking not related to ads, and script blocking tools as > well. I can give those memory hungry things a toss in the trash before > they even load. > > Maybe that will help. Of course, it could be just Firefox being > Firefox. I have seen mine use 2GBs in the past but never that much. :/ > > Hope that leads to a clue. > It's a good tip, but the report seems to be a bit optimistic. Firefox claims there are 5 processes using ~500MB each, yet if I close Firefox 10G is suddenly free. Regardless of whether or not Firefox thinks it is using the memory, the kernel thinks it is, because OOM killer triggers. It may or may not be related to certain webpages, I can't especially tell. Cheers, R0b0t1
Re: [gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
R0b0t1 wrote: > Hello List, > > This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read > that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are > unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if > not closely monitored. > > If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? > > Cheers, > R0b0t1 > > Have you checked to see what in Firefox is using that memory? about:memory Then click on Verbose and then Measure. In the past, I have found websites that are just awful at loading everything Firefox has and usually for no good reason. It's one reason I use adblock, with some custom blocking not related to ads, and script blocking tools as well. I can give those memory hungry things a toss in the trash before they even load. Maybe that will help. Of course, it could be just Firefox being Firefox. I have seen mine use 2GBs in the past but never that much. :/ Hope that leads to a clue. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
On Sun, Feb 18 2018, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:20:26 -0500, John Blinka wrote: > >> > Your best bet is to keyword gnucash-2.7.4, which does use the up to >> > date webkit-gtk. >> >> Tried that and gnucash-2.7.4 (and dependencies) do build without any >> troubles. But https://gnucash.org/news.phtml declares that all 2.7.* >> versions are unstable, so I >> prefer not to risk it. > > Fair comment, if it was just that the ebuild was in testing, I'd give it > a go but if the project devs say it's not stable, well.. The exact words in the bug (621532 comment 60) are Just to reiterate. There are no plans to fix this webkit-gtk ancient SLOT, because it will be last rited any day now; just waiting on gnucash-2.7 stabilization to proceed after some (probably harmless) test failures are fixed or deemed nonblocking. > I no longer use Gnucash, having switched to KMyMoney a few years ago. Now > that's just jumped a major version and I had to mask it because of > missing features... so much for progress. Understood. I am a little fearful of the new gnucash. But fortunately I am not a power user. (Hopefully canek uses gnucash). allan
Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 18:20:26 -0500, John Blinka wrote: > > Your best bet is to keyword gnucash-2.7.4, which does use the up to > > date webkit-gtk. > > Tried that and gnucash-2.7.4 (and dependencies) do build without any > troubles. But https://gnucash.org/news.phtml declares that all 2.7.* > versions are unstable, so I > prefer not to risk it. Fair comment, if it was just that the ebuild was in testing, I'd give it a go but if the project devs say it's not stable, well.. I no longer use Gnucash, having switched to KMyMoney a few years ago. Now that's just jumped a major version and I had to mask it because of missing features... so much for progress. -- Neil Bothwick The quickest way to a man's heart is through his sternum. pgpc2bYksZka9.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Boot Gentoo live iso from grub
On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 00:44:05 +0200, zless wrote:
> I've grown a bit tired by this already. Before I will try your and
> Neil's suggestions I will test my luck with the Sysrescuecd iso.
> It seems that more people are interested in this and are reporting
> success.
submenu "SystemRescueCd 64 bit options" {
menuentry "SystemRescueCd with default options" {
linux (loop)/isolinux/rescue64 isoloop=$isofile
initrd (loop)/isolinux/initram.igz
}
menuentry "SystemRescueCd with all files cached to memory" {
linux (loop)/isolinux/rescue64 isoloop=$isofile docache
initrd (loop)/isolinux/initram.igz
}
}
You can also add extra boot options, like setting the keymap to avoid the
boot process pausing to ask for your choice.
There's also a way to boot systemrescuecd from a bootloader that doesn't
support ISO loading, like the systemd UEFI boot manager (aka gummiboot).
--
Neil Bothwick
Top Oxymorons Number 23: Sweet sorrow
pgpVFeZ4mn8VT.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
On Sat, Feb 17 2018, John Blinka wrote: > Hi, all, > > A recent update demanded that I rebuild webkit-gtk-2.4.11-r200. > Unfortunately I cannot get this package to rebuild. > > In my experience, this particular version of webkit-gtk has always > been a very fragile build. I've put way too much time into wrestling > with it and I'd like to get rid of it. There's a newer version: > webkit-gtk-2.18.6, which builds with no problems. > > The only package on my system that needs webkit-gtk is gnucash. All > of the stable ebuilds for gnucash contain this line > >=net-libs/webkit-gtk-1.2:2 > And all of the versions of webkit-gtk in portage satisfy this condition. I am in the same situation and I believe a number of other are as well. The old webkit-gtk is approaching end-of-life and the new gnucash that uses the new webkit-gtk is (they say) soon to become gentoo stable. NOTE. The new gnucash uses a new database format so you should back up your old database before updating gnucash (see the news item). I am waiting for the new gnucash to become stable (and will probably wait a little more). I back up the gnucash database daily. I would be quite put out if gnucash was unavailable for even a modest time period. What I do in the meantime is emerge --update --pretend @world and then manually emerge -1 all packages mentioned except webkit-gtk I do a similar procedure for emerge @preserved rebuild allan
[gentoo-user] Firefox Using 10G of RAM
Hello List, This isn't normal. Is it due to the new process model? I think I read that now they emulate chrome, which possibly means both browsers are unsuitable for use. Firefox will require its threads be OOM killed if not closely monitored. If it can be fixed - can anyone explain? Cheers, R0b0t1
Re: [gentoo-user] grub2: hidden menu unless shift pressed?
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 3:58 PM, Daniel Frey wrote: > > It's been a while since I've done this, but I thought the hotkey was ESC > not shift? > > All I had to do was use: > > GRUB_TIMEOUT=0 > GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=5 > > Grub will wait for the escape key to be pressed for 5 seconds, if no > keypress, it would boot. "GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT" and "GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT_QUIET" have been deprecated (not - yet? - obsoleted) in favor of "GRUB_TIMEOUT_STYLE".
Re: [gentoo-user] grub2: hidden menu unless shift pressed?
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 3:36 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: > > I'm trying to figure out how to configure grub 2.02 so that no menu is > displayed and it will boot immediately to the default unless shift is > held down during boot -- in which case it displays the menu and waits > indefinitely for a choice to be made. > > This is a bare-bones grub2 installation without any of the > auto-magical, config generator scripts. All I have is grub.cfg and an > editor. > > I've found many web pages that say all you have to to is edit > /etc/default/grub and set GRUB_TIMEOUT=0 and GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=0 and > Bob's your uncle. Of course that file gets mashed about by dozens of > shell scripts comprising thousands of lines of code to product the > real grub.cfg containing hundreds of lines of code. > > [Oh God, how I hate grub2.] > > AFAICT, you end up with > > set timeout=0 > set timeout_style=hidden > > But, that doesn't seem to work. Holding down the shift key during boot > doesn't cause the menu to be displayed, and it always boots directly > to the default no matter what you do. > > Any grub2 experts care to lend a clue? I don't have a grub2-on-Gentoo install but the below is from a test Debian VM. "90-grub" is the only executable file in "/etc/grub.d/" and pressing "shift" displays the grub menu. I've had problems with "shift" with grub1 and grub2 in the past and I'd use "set timeout=1" and press "esc" in order to display the grub menu if I were you. root@sysd ~ # grub-install --version grub-install (GRUB) 2.02-2 root@sysd ~ # cat /etc/grub.d/90-grub #!/bin/sh cat <
Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > > They don't. Note the slot specification at the end, there is only one > version in slot 2, the one that gives all the trouble. Thanks for pointing that out. > > Your best bet is to keyword gnucash-2.7.4, which does use the up to date > webkit-gtk. Tried that and gnucash-2.7.4 (and dependencies) do build without any troubles. But https://gnucash.org/news.phtml declares that all 2.7.* versions are unstable, so I prefer not to risk it.I have finally managed to get webkit-gtk-2.4,11,r200 to build by unsetting a number of use flags and building strictly in serial mode, so problem is solved at the expense of substantially increased build time. Appreciate your help. John
Re: [gentoo-user] Boot Gentoo live iso from grub
În ziua de sâmbătă, 17 februarie 2018, la 10:44:03 EET, R0b0t1 a scris:
> The difference being a change in parameter name. isoloop is now
> isoboot. If that fails look at
> https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7719674.html#7719674, but it
> seems to contain the same changes.
Thank you for your findings. Unfortunately it still doesn't work
with the same issue: will not find/mount the root device.
After booting I can't even mount /dev/ram0 manually at the busybox
prompt and this looks like a bigger issue to me.
>
> Having read all of that again this does seem like the fix. If that
> *still* doesn't work, recursively grep the unpacked ISO file for
> either isoloop or isoboot to find the location in the script you
> should be looking at.
I've grown a bit tired by this already. Before I will try your and
Neil's suggestions I will test my luck with the Sysrescuecd iso.
It seems that more people are interested in this and are reporting
success.
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 1:34 PM, zless wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I'm trying to have the Gentoo Live CD ISO as a recovery media in grub.
> >
> > I tried all the options I could think off in a custom grub menu entry like
> > this:
> >
> > menuentry "Gentoo ISO" {
> > set cmdline="root=/dev/ram0 init=/linuxrc dokeymap looptype=squashfs
> > loop=/image.squashfs cdroot initrd=gentoo.igz BOOT_IMAGE=gentoo"
> > loopback loop /path/to/iso/install-amd64-minimal-20180206T214502Z.iso
> > linux (loop)/isolinux/gentoo $cmdline isoloop=/image.squashfs
> > initrd=gentoo.igz vga=791 BOOT_IMAGE=gentoo
> > initrd (loop)/isolinux/gentoo.igz
> > }
> >
> > It boots the live CD kernel, it even asks for the keymap but then it fails
> > to mount the root device.
> >
> > Any idea how to properly boot the iso from grub?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
[gentoo-user] Re: grub2: hidden menu unless shift pressed?
On 2018-02-17, Grant Edwards wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out how to configure grub 2.02 so that no menu is
> displayed and it will boot immediately to the default unless shift is
> held down during boot -- in which case it displays the menu and waits
> indefinitely for a choice to be made.
FWIW, the config file I ended up with is below. For a good laugh,
compare it with the 300-line monstrosity your favorite distro produces
auto-magically.
Despite grub2 documentation to the contrary, 'keystatus --shift' does
not always return true if the shift key is held down. In my testing
it only returns true if shift was up when grub started and _then_ was
pressed and held down. If you press shift before grub starts (and
hold it down) then 'keystatus --shift' returns false. [Maybe this is
HW dependent?]
That's why I added the double "A above middle C" beep followed by 1
second of silence: provides a window during which you can press the
shift key. I would prefer it if you could just press and hold the
shift key immediately after power-on, but it'll do.
--
set root=(hd0,3)
insmod play
play 6000 440 10 0 20 440 10 0 100
set default=0
if keystatus --shift; then
set timeout=-1
set timeout_style=menu
else
set timeout=0
set timeout_style=hidden
fi
menuentry "Windows"{
[...]
}
menuentry "Recovery"{
[...]
}
--
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! I wonder if I ought
at to tell them about my
gmail.comPREVIOUS LIFE as a COMPLETE
STRANGER?
Re: [gentoo-user] grub2: hidden menu unless shift pressed?
On 02/17/18 12:36, Grant Edwards wrote: > I'm trying to figure out how to configure grub 2.02 so that no menu is > displayed and it will boot immediately to the default unless shift is > held down during boot -- in which case it displays the menu and waits > indefinitely for a choice to be made. > > This is a bare-bones grub2 installation without any of the > auto-magical, config generator scripts. All I have is grub.cfg and an > editor. > > I've found many web pages that say all you have to to is edit > /etc/default/grub and set GRUB_TIMEOUT=0 and GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=0 and > Bob's your uncle. Of course that file gets mashed about by dozens of > shell scripts comprising thousands of lines of code to product the > real grub.cfg containing hundreds of lines of code. > > [Oh God, how I hate grub2.] > > AFAICT, you end up with > > set timeout=0 > set timeout_style=hidden > > But, that doesn't seem to work. Holding down the shift key during boot > doesn't cause the menu to be displayed, and it always boots directly > to the default no matter what you do. > > Any grub2 experts care to lend a clue? > It's been a while since I've done this, but I thought the hotkey was ESC not shift? All I had to do was use: GRUB_TIMEOUT=0 GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=5 Grub will wait for the escape key to be pressed for 5 seconds, if no keypress, it would boot. Dan
[gentoo-user] grub2: hidden menu unless shift pressed?
I'm trying to figure out how to configure grub 2.02 so that no menu is displayed and it will boot immediately to the default unless shift is held down during boot -- in which case it displays the menu and waits indefinitely for a choice to be made. This is a bare-bones grub2 installation without any of the auto-magical, config generator scripts. All I have is grub.cfg and an editor. I've found many web pages that say all you have to to is edit /etc/default/grub and set GRUB_TIMEOUT=0 and GRUB_HIDDEN_TIMEOUT=0 and Bob's your uncle. Of course that file gets mashed about by dozens of shell scripts comprising thousands of lines of code to product the real grub.cfg containing hundreds of lines of code. [Oh God, how I hate grub2.] AFAICT, you end up with set timeout=0 set timeout_style=hidden But, that doesn't seem to work. Holding down the shift key during boot doesn't cause the menu to be displayed, and it always boots directly to the default no matter what you do. Any grub2 experts care to lend a clue? -- Grant Edwards grant.b.edwardsYow! MERYL STREEP is my at obstetrician! gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 15:23:13 -0500, John Blinka wrote: > The only package on my system that needs webkit-gtk is gnucash. All > of the stable ebuilds for gnucash contain this line > >=net-libs/webkit-gtk-1.2:2 > And all of the versions of webkit-gtk in portage satisfy this condition. They don't. Note the slot specification at the end, there is only one version in slot 2, the one that gives all the trouble. > So, I ought to be able to use webkit-2.18.6, right? Your best bet is to keyword gnucash-2.7.4, which does use the up to date webkit-gtk. -- Neil Bothwick EASY TO INSTALL = Difficult to install, but instruction manual has pictures. pgpFRSaJ0HIYJ.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] webkit-gtk build failure and masking confusion
Hi, all, A recent update demanded that I rebuild webkit-gtk-2.4.11-r200. Unfortunately I cannot get this package to rebuild. In my experience, this particular version of webkit-gtk has always been a very fragile build. I've put way too much time into wrestling with it and I'd like to get rid of it. There's a newer version: webkit-gtk-2.18.6, which builds with no problems. The only package on my system that needs webkit-gtk is gnucash. All of the stable ebuilds for gnucash contain this line >=net-libs/webkit-gtk-1.2:2 And all of the versions of webkit-gtk in portage satisfy this condition. So, I ought to be able to use webkit-2.18.6, right? But, I cannot get portage to agree to use webkit-2.18.6. It insists that this package is masked.. And I cannot figure out how or why it is masked. Nothing masks it in /etc/portage. It's keyworded amd64, which is what I'm running. I have followed through all the mask/unmask files in my profile (default/linux/amd64/17.0/desktop (stable)) and have found webkit-gtk mentioned precisely twice: in /usr/portage/profiles/arch/base/package.use.mask and /usr/portage/profiles/arch/amd64/package.use.mask. The comments in these files suggest that the use flag "jit" is masked in general, but allowed in amd64. So there's nothing I know to look for that seems to prevent any available version of webkit-gtk from being considered. Yet if I mask off webkit-gtk-2.4.11-r200 in /etc/portage/package.mask and attempt to build gnucash, I get his error message: !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=net-libs/webkit-gtk-1.2:2" have been masked. !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request: - net-libs/webkit-gtk-2.4.11-r200::gentoo (masked by: package.mask) And that's on a system that contains webkit-gtk-2.18.6. Can anyone explain to me why portage won't use webkit-gtk-2.18.6 to satisfy gnucash's needs? Thanks, John Blinka
Re: [gentoo-user] DRM error: couldn't read SADs
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 10:23:45 GMT Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 01:10:16 GMT Jack wrote: > > It's been a long time since I've needed to do it, and it was also due > > to a (cheap?) KVM switch, but I think there are two things that might > > help. First, if you boot the PC with that monitor connected, it might > > actually read the EDID data. Even if not, if you can capture it (one > > time use of a straigt DVI or VGA cable?) you can save it tp a file > > using x11-misc/read-edid, and then there is a way to get kernel/X to > > read that EDID file at startup instead of trying and failing to get it > > directly from the monitor. If you can't find a reference, I'll dig and > > try to figure out if it's kernel paramater or xorg.conf that you need > > to mess with. > > Yes, I remember something along those lines - reading EDID from a file > instead of the device. I don't think it's that simple though, as the > screen is being driven at the right resolution. I just get half-a-dozen > or so errors reported during a full day. > > I'm expecting the bits to make a direct connection to arrive today, so > fingers crossed ... For the record, the more direct link (a cable with DisplayPort at one end and HDMI at the other) has cleared the SAD problem, but not the balance of the picture. And I'm left with no all-inclusive KVM. Those are problems for another day... -- Regards, Peter.
Re: [gentoo-user] Boot Gentoo live iso from grub
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 02:44:03 -0600, R0b0t1 wrote: > Having read all of that again this does seem like the fix. If that > *still* doesn't work, recursively grep the unpacked ISO file for > either isoloop or isoboot to find the location in the script you > should be looking at. That isn't enough because the code you need is in the nit script, which is inside the initramfs. Loop mount the ISO, cd into an empty directory and run zcat ../path/to/gentoo.igz | cpio -id You can safely ignore any errors about permission to create nodes, you are not interested in that part. Then inspect the init script. grep iso init should be enough but some init scripts source other script or hook files so a bit of detective work may be needed. I have to do this regularly and there is no simple one size fits all solution. I used zcat because the file has a gz extension, but use file to check the compression type used on the initramfs before running that command. -- Neil Bothwick UNILINGUAL: American. pgphonP02ZUn5.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Boot Gentoo live iso from grub
I take it you have read
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-790015-highlight-grub2+iso.html.
This did not work for me either, and it would leave me in the same
place: the root filesystem would not be uncompressed and pivoted to.
I can't remember exactly what the change was, but I think I retrieved
the answer from that thread. Try the entry at
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-6348023.html#6348023, which is:
menuentry "Gentoo Linux minimal install" {
loopback loop /boot/iso/install-amd64-minimal-20100408.iso
linux (loop)/isolinux/gentoo root=/dev/ram0 init=/linuxrc dokeymap
looptype=squashfs loop=/image.squashfs cdroot initrd=gentoo.igz
isoboot=/boot/iso/install-amd64-minimal-20100408.iso
initrd (loop)/isolinux/gentoo.igz
}
The difference being a change in parameter name. isoloop is now
isoboot. If that fails look at
https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-7719674.html#7719674, but it
seems to contain the same changes.
Having read all of that again this does seem like the fix. If that
*still* doesn't work, recursively grep the unpacked ISO file for
either isoloop or isoboot to find the location in the script you
should be looking at.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 1:34 PM, zless wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm trying to have the Gentoo Live CD ISO as a recovery media in grub.
>
> I tried all the options I could think off in a custom grub menu entry like
> this:
>
> menuentry "Gentoo ISO" {
> set cmdline="root=/dev/ram0 init=/linuxrc dokeymap looptype=squashfs
> loop=/image.squashfs cdroot initrd=gentoo.igz BOOT_IMAGE=gentoo"
> loopback loop /path/to/iso/install-amd64-minimal-20180206T214502Z.iso
> linux (loop)/isolinux/gentoo $cmdline isoloop=/image.squashfs
> initrd=gentoo.igz vga=791 BOOT_IMAGE=gentoo
> initrd (loop)/isolinux/gentoo.igz
> }
>
> It boots the live CD kernel, it even asks for the keymap but then it fails to
> mount the root device.
>
> Any idea how to properly boot the iso from grub?
>
>
>
>
>
