[gentoo-science] emerge failed

[gentoo-science] emerge failed

[Justin]

Hi all.
I tried to emerge coot-0.3.3 with new-interface which failed
(http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202599). Now I recognised that
at my office computer, which is basically of the same software setup,
coot emerged with the 1.99 version of gtkglarea.
My question now is, how can I easily compare the systems (Useflags used,
packages emerged...) to figure out the difference.

Thanks for suggestions  Justin
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] emerge failed

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 19:18 Mon 17 Dec     , Justin wrote:
> Hi all.
> I tried to emerge coot-0.3.3 with new-interface which failed
> (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202599). Now I recognised that
> at my office computer, which is basically of the same software setup,
> coot emerged with the 1.99 version of gtkglarea.
> My question now is, how can I easily compare the systems (Useflags used,
> packages emerged...) to figure out the difference.

You can install portage-utils and run `qlist -I -U -v packagename` to 
show the versions and USE flags of various packages. Relevant ones would 
probably be coot, gtkglarea, maybe gtkglext. I'm not really sure why it 
would even be looking for gtkglarea with new-interface on, though, since 
that should only be for the old gtk-1 interface.

Since that bug shows that a header wasn't found at 
/usr/include/gtkgl/gtkglarea.h, it might be worth checking whether that 
file exists.

I've got some newer ebuilds around for 0.4 prereleases that I could add 
to the tree masked, if that would help.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] emerge failed

[Justin]

Donnie Berkholz schrieb:
> On 19:18 Mon 17 Dec     , Justin wrote:
>   
>> Hi all.
>> I tried to emerge coot-0.3.3 with new-interface which failed
>> (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202599). Now I recognised that
>> at my office computer, which is basically of the same software setup,
>> coot emerged with the 1.99 version of gtkglarea.
>> My question now is, how can I easily compare the systems (Useflags used,
>> packages emerged...) to figure out the difference.
>>     
>
> You can install portage-utils and run `qlist -I -U -v packagename` to 
> show the versions and USE flags of various packages. Relevant ones would 
> probably be coot, gtkglarea, maybe gtkglext. I'm not really sure why it 
> would even be looking for gtkglarea with new-interface on, though, since 
> that should only be for the old gtk-1 interface.
>
> Since that bug shows that a header wasn't found at 
> /usr/include/gtkgl/gtkglarea.h, it might be worth checking whether that 
> file exists.
>   
This file belongs to x11-libs/gtkglarea-1.2.3-r1. So this package must
be emerged for coot.
> I've got some newer ebuilds around for 0.4 prereleases that I could add 
> to the tree masked, if that would help.
>   
I thought for myself writing an ebuild for that, but I didn't found the
sources. But I will be a happy tester if you need. The same, if you need
help maintaining packages, i offer my help. The science thing should
enlarge in gentoo. I wrote a couple of ebuild for my private-overlay,
which work fine for me. Perhaps there is some need for that. Some
packages are Arpwarp, xds, cara, and i'm working on phaser or rewriting
the ccp4 ebuild so that it could emerge phaser as a dep. The only thing
which im not sure about is the legal thing with those ebuilds. So if you
could teach me which license the writing of ebuild alows and which, I
publish them.

Thanks justin

> Thanks,
> Donnie
>   
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] emerge failed

[Donnie Berkholz]

On 09:23 Wed 19 Dec     , Justin wrote:
> 
> Donnie Berkholz schrieb:
> > On 19:18 Mon 17 Dec     , Justin wrote:
> >   
> > Since that bug shows that a header wasn't found at 
> > /usr/include/gtkgl/gtkglarea.h, it might be worth checking whether that 
> > file exists.
> >   
> This file belongs to x11-libs/gtkglarea-1.2.3-r1. So this package must
> be emerged for coot.

That's not quite what I was asking. Does the file physically exist on 
the filesystem?

> > I've got some newer ebuilds around for 0.4 prereleases that I could add 
> > to the tree masked, if that would help.

I just added 0.4_pre2-r549. Unfortunately I couldn't find a better way 
to deal with the upstream revision number than using ours for it.

> I thought for myself writing an ebuild for that, but I didn't found 
> the sources. But I will be a happy tester if you need. The same, if 
> you need help maintaining packages, i offer my help. The science thing 
> should enlarge in gentoo. I wrote a couple of ebuild for my 
> private-overlay, which work fine for me. Perhaps there is some need 
> for that. Some packages are Arpwarp, xds, cara, and i'm working on 
> phaser or rewriting the ccp4 ebuild so that it could emerge phaser as 
> a dep. The only thing which im not sure about is the legal thing with 
> those ebuilds. So if you could teach me which license the writing of 
> ebuild alows and which, I publish them.

I'd love to see those ebuilds. Could you get access to the science 
overlay so you could commit them? Regarding Phaser, my basic plan was to 
get a separate cctbx ebuild, then separate ebuilds for Phaser, Chooch, 
etc., rather than make the ccp4 ebuild any more disgusting than it 
already is.

The ebuilds themselves are perfectly legal since they're just recipes. 
If the source-code license is restrictive, we can add various types of 
RESTRICT settings to the ebuilds to prevent redistribution on Gentoo 
mirrors (RESTRICT=mirror) or to force people to manually download it 
(RESTRICT=fetch and pkg_nofetch() function).

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-science] emerge failed

[Justin]

Donnie Berkholz schrieb:
> On 09:23 Wed 19 Dec     , Justin wrote:
>   
>> Donnie Berkholz schrieb:
>>     
>>> On 19:18 Mon 17 Dec     , Justin wrote:
>>>   
>>> Since that bug shows that a header wasn't found at 
>>> /usr/include/gtkgl/gtkglarea.h, it might be worth checking whether that 
>>> file exists.
>>>   
>>>       
>> This file belongs to x11-libs/gtkglarea-1.2.3-r1. So this package must
>> be emerged for coot.
>>     
>
> That's not quite what I was asking. Does the file physically exist on 
> the filesystem?
>
>   
It exists and is provided by x11-libs/gtkglarea-1.2.3-r1.
>>> I've got some newer ebuilds around for 0.4 prereleases that I could add 
>>> to the tree masked, if that would help.
>>>       
>
> I just added 0.4_pre2-r549. Unfortunately I couldn't find a better way 
> to deal with the upstream revision number than using ours for it.
>
>   
>> I thought for myself writing an ebuild for that, but I didn't found 
>> the sources. But I will be a happy tester if you need. The same, if 
>> you need help maintaining packages, i offer my help. The science thing 
>> should enlarge in gentoo. I wrote a couple of ebuild for my 
>> private-overlay, which work fine for me. Perhaps there is some need 
>> for that. Some packages are Arpwarp, xds, cara, and i'm working on 
>> phaser or rewriting the ccp4 ebuild so that it could emerge phaser as 
>> a dep. The only thing which im not sure about is the legal thing with 
>> those ebuilds. So if you could teach me which license the writing of 
>> ebuild alows and which, I publish them.
>>     
>
> I'd love to see those ebuilds. Could you get access to the science 
> overlay so you could commit them? 
How can I do this?
> Regarding Phaser, my basic plan was to 
> get a separate cctbx ebuild, then separate ebuilds for Phaser, Chooch, 
> etc., rather than make the ccp4 ebuild any more disgusting than it 
> already is.
>
> The ebuilds themselves are perfectly legal since they're just recipes. 
> If the source-code license is restrictive, we can add various types of 
> RESTRICT settings to the ebuilds to prevent redistribution on Gentoo 
> mirrors (RESTRICT=mirror) or to force people to manually download it 
> (RESTRICT=fetch and pkg_nofetch() function).
>
> Thanks,
> Donnie
>   
-- 
gentoo-science@gentoo.org mailing list