gmane.linux.lfs.beyond.devel

Re: midori-0.5.2 and WebKitGTK+-1.10.2

Fernando — 2013-05-18T19:50:50

Em 18-05-2013 16:47, Armin K. escreveu:

That explains it. When I build in my new machine, if I do not go for
wkgt+2, I will tell, then.

Thanks, Armin.

Re: midori-0.5.2 and WebKitGTK+-1.10.2

Fernando — 2013-05-18T19:47:14

Em 18-05-2013 16:36, Fernando escreveu:

Forgot: it was curious that 0.5.1 displayed 0.5.0 in help/about, or from
command line, then discovered the new release.
.

Re: midori-0.5.2 and WebKitGTK+-1.10.2

Armin K. — 2013-05-18T19:47:08

I use WebKitGTK 2.0.2, not 1.10.2 - that's why it wasn't updated. I have 
WebKitGTK 1.10.2 build for GTK+2 though (2.0.0 doesn't support GStreamer 
0.10 which mostly GTK+2 apps use), but it was rebuilt when I upgraded 
libpng to 1.6.x. Not sure if I was using software same as in LFS 7.3 (I 
don't build every LFS, I upgrade regulary). My current software is more 
like from latest LFS SVN.

midori-0.5.2 and WebKitGTK+-1.10.2

Fernando — 2013-05-18T19:36:51

This was released yesterday, previous, the day before.

Writing this, because noticed that:

midori-0.5.1:     "build and work properly using an *LFS-7.3* platform"
WebKitGTK+-1.10.2:"build and work properly using an *LFS-7.2* platform".


WebKitGTK+ tag change was forgotten to be updated, as it is required by
midori?

Re: Tag LFS 7.3 (built or executed properly)

Fernando — 2013-05-17T23:43:37

Em 16-05-2013 18:26, Fernando escreveu:

2. Fuse-2.9.2
3. sshfs-fuse-2.4

Fuse is required by sshfs. Just tested mount, used a file, umounted
remote directory.

Fcron-3.1.2

Fernando — 2013-05-16T22:03:09

1. If "--with-dsssl-dir=/usr/share/sgml/docbook/dsssl-stylesheets-1.79"
is used, configure fails for not finding the stylesheets.

However, docbook-dsssl-1.79 is not mentioned as dependency, and
DocBook-utils-0.6.14 is mentioned just as optional.


2. Command Explanations
autoconf: This command is required to rebuild configure using the fixed
input file.

However, it is not used (probably left from some previous version).

Tag LFS 7.3 (built or executed properly)

Fernando — 2013-05-16T21:26:56

I am building (very, very slowly) some packages in SVN > 7.3.

As you may have noticed, I am not that organized, so instead of making a
list in text, if you do not mind, I will be replying to this message
with just one line added with the package name and if it builds or runs
successfully.

UnRar-4.2.4 - built and tested to run properly (liste the files inside
and uncompressed one file.rar)

Re: A proposal

Armin K. — 2013-05-15T08:58:01

I've been thinking ... By creating a seperate branch with systemd and 
all that stuff, we can ditch nearly 1/3 of BLFS packages. We'd need to 
discuss what we want to keep and what not. I'd certainly like to keep 
some of the gnome apps (which don't heavily depend on desktop related 
packages). I'll take a look on the weekend.

Re: A proposal

Bruce Dubbs — 2013-05-15T03:00:42

That's the design of BLFS.  You are supposed to pick what you think you 
need.


We've gone through this before.  The problem is that there are too many 
inter-dependencies.  Right now we are looking at creating a separate 
branch for those packages that need systemd (e.g. most recent Gnome).

   -- Bruce

Re: A proposal

Rob Landley — 2013-05-15T02:45:21

That archive doesn't go back far enough. (January 2012.) And  
archive.org hasn't recorded the actual archive since 2007...

Ah, here we go:  
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lfs.beyond.devel/20066

In which I said:


I've used BLFS to build basic X11 support, and I've used it to build a
few servers.  I cherry picked because building the whole thing is
ridiculous.

Possibly it's time to split the thing into smaller chunks?  The layers I
see are (roughly):

1) Infrastructure (chapters 3, 5-8, 10-12).
2) Networking (chapters 4, 13-22)
3) Multimedia (chapters 9, 23-25, 31-44)

And then separate appendices on KDE and Gnome and XFCE and such.

What I'm looking at is "what might people want to skip?"  A headless box
may not need any of the multimedia stuff.  A DVD player may not need any
of the networking stuff.  (It's likely that #2 and #3 are going to need
things out of #1, but they need stuff out of the base LFS too,
prerequisites are inevitable you just try to keep them under control.)

Rob

Re: A proposal

Bruce Dubbs — 2013-05-14T17:03:37


Try searching http://www.mail-archive.com/blfs-dev< at >linuxfromscratch.org/


   -- Bruce

Re: A proposal

Rob Landley — 2013-05-14T05:39:56

I suggested some time ago that the Gnome/KDE stuff be split out from  
the rest of BLFS, because it was sucking up all the developers time but  
not of interest to people who want to use xfce or fluxbox or similar.  
(Or just make an elaborate non-gui dedicated system to be a mail server  
or something.)

I'd link to the actual post under  
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev with my  
suggestions of obvious cleavage lines to break BLFS into separate  
books, but the mailing list archive is 404.


There's also bound to be a better way to do it than Pointy Hair Linux's  
pet project. Long ago I decided I didn't like udev, and did mdev  
instead. These days, devtmpfs does the most interesting bits of what  
mdev did anyway

If there's a real need for a "oh please not systemd" project that stubs  
out these strange dependencies or something, I can add it to my todo  
list. (I'd rather somebody else did, of course...)

Rob

Re: [blfs-book] r11174 - trunk/BOOK/kde/add

Ragnar Thomsen — 2013-05-13T19:03:41

Ok, so that's why your build didn't fail. The patch fixes a test. So unless we 
disable the tests for kdepim in blfs, we need the patch.

-Ragnar

Re: [blfs-book] r11174 - trunk/BOOK/kde/add

Armin K. — 2013-05-13T18:34:35

# kdepim
cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release 
-DKDE4_BUILD_TESTS=OFF -DCMAKE_SKIP_RPATH=ON -DKDEPIM_BUILD_MOBILE=OFF

This is what I used.

Re: [blfs-book] r11174 - trunk/BOOK/kde/add

Ragnar Thomsen — 2013-05-13T17:55:59

The build failed for me without the patch. The old patch fixed two files. One 
of them was fixed in 4.10.3, but the other file still needs patch.

Seems strange that your build didn't fail, though. Did you build the tests 
(KDE4_BUILD_TESTS)?

-Ragnar

Re: A proposal

Bruce Dubbs — 2013-05-13T17:52:20


Do you want to create it or do you want me to do it?  Either way is OK.


OK.  We can always adjust the site as needed.


I've never liked GNOME, but use some of the apps.  I used to use KDE, 
but the later versions seemed klunky and bloated.  I now use xfce with a 
few kde apps and an occasional gmome app.


I prefer working from the Trac tickets.  I don't see much there that I 
use regularly, but I can do some of those.  If there are additional 
tickets created I can probably work some of those.

I may create some scripts to check the latest packages for at least some 
of the packages in BLFS similar to the one in LFS that I just did. 
Perhaps a script for each Part (12 scripts) may be useful.

   -- Bruce

Re: [blfs-book] r11174 - trunk/BOOK/kde/add

Armin K. — 2013-05-13T17:20:49

Are you sure? I didn't need any patch yesterday to build kdepim 4.10.3.

Re: A proposal

Armin K. — 2013-05-13T12:17:42

A systemd blfs branch would be fine since we already have systemd lfs 
branch. There is no need to reference it anywhere on the main site - 
just an initial announcement should be fine.

As for the GNOME, I think that 3.8 could be made to work without systemd 
(minus some functionality - not sure which one) but as I said, I am 
systemd user and I am not going to put the effort into making packages 
that depend on systemd work without it.

I can still maintain both of BLFS branches like Matt does for LFS and 
LFS Systemd (merging changes that don't conflict with other ones), but 
some help is always welcome - there are packages out of date that I 
don't or won't maintain (not using them or such).

Proposal about SANE

Jean-Philippe MENGUAL — 2013-05-13T00:07:29

Hi,

dependency for USB scanners. Actually it's required for USB scanners. Otherwise,
usb.h isn't installed (by libusb) and sane doesn't build with usb support.
Thus, the user cannot use usb scanners.

Hope it helps.

Regards,

Re: A proposal

Bruce Dubbs — 2013-05-12T19:35:59


I'd like to make an alternative proposal.  How about removing those 
packages from BLFS (e.g. Gnome) that need systemd and putting them into 
a separate document that references the main BLFS packages as needed. 
There are many packages in BLFS that do not need or use systemd, but can 
be used in a systemd environment.  Doing the work of maintaining 
packages in two documents seems counterproductive to me.  Links between 
separate packages are not unreasonable.  There are several links in LFS 
to BLFS.

The reason I do not want to use systemd in LFS is because it makes the 
boot process opaque.  I think presenting what happens during boot is an 
important educational goal of LFS.  Being able to read short bash 
scripts and using separate programs like syslogd accomplishes that goal 
much more simply and visibly than systemd.  There are also many parts of 
systemd that are simply not required in a linux system, but are there to 
support only large multi-user systems (e.g. cgroups).  A basic system 
just does not need resource limiting, prioritization, accounting, and 
controlling of groups.

If a course was given that explained the Linux system using LFS, a 
second course explaining systemd and other advanced concepts such as 
initrd, raid, lvm, security, etc would build on the base concepts.


Is that needed?  We can do that, but a branch seems easier to me.  The 
thing that would be needed is to publicize the branch on the website. 
We really haven't done that for the systemd version of LFS either.

BTW, the reason I haven't been doing more for BLFS is because you have 
been doing such a good job.  If you want me to take more on, I can do that.

   -- Bruce

A proposal

Armin K. — 2013-05-12T17:47:01

Warning: Long post ahead.

Hi,

I want to announce that I won't be upgrading packages in standard BLFS 
anymore. The GNOME/GTK+ Project packages are becoming outdated and newer 
package that are adjusted for them seem to be more or less "failing" 
with older ones (See several NetworkManager threads on blfs-support). On 
the other side, I use Systemd and my system isn't anymore compatible 
with any of the desktops (I can only check if they work with Systemd not 
with ConsoleKit).

I want to propose a systemd branch for BLFS, where we (for now, I) can 
upgrade all packages that now depend on Systemd and make existing ones 
work with it, too. Since we have LFS branch (which needs some more love) 
it shouldn't be hard to adjust BLFS packages for systemd. Many packages 
ship systemd units by itself and I have added several of systemd units 
into blfs-bootscripts tarball. That way it would make it easier for me 
to maintain the packages (since for now only myself and Ragnar (for KDE) 
seem to be maintaining most of BLFS - with Bruce working most of the 
time on LFS and Ken being retired - no words of others as of this moment 
(Thomas, Randy, Dj).)

If possible, I'd like to host systemd branch on LFS servers - just on 
another repository (like done for LFS). If so, then cam someone please 
(Bruce, Matt, Gerrard) who has access to the servers, setup necesary 
stuff (take your time) with everything as BLFS has (no need to change 
anything - not either people who have commit access to the repo) except 
the url to access the page. If not, I'll host a static html version in 
my home directory, but I'm afraid that I'll be the only editor then.

As for LFS Systemd, I have few things to tidy up.

One is to add ACL package - not a hard dependency but systemd make 
install calls setfacl on /var/log/journal to set up necesary permissions 
- plus coreutils, sed and maybe some other packages use its library for 
some features. Systemd and udev use its library too, so we would benefit 
there too. The package somehow goes with attr and libcap and even if we 
can omit it, I strongly suggest we support the package in LFS. Another 
thing - it would make our (for now my) life with BLFS easier since I 
already said, attr and acl always go both as a dependency in most cases.

Split (again) XML::Parser from Perl page as suggested on ml.

Write a page about clock creation (UTC-LOCALTIME switching via 
timedatectl and /etc/adjtime).

Finish static network package (previously lfs-bootscripts, now 
networking package with systemd units) and (re)add a page about the 
configuration.

Rework Systemd page a bit, since only version number and md5sum has been 
bumped since the original instructions have been written and there have 
been some other changes to consider.

Add kernel configuration options necesary for Systemd.

If there are any obligations, please speak. I won't do anything before 
next Friday.

Thanks for your time.