[gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alex Schuster]

Hi there!

I am not running ~x86 at the moment. I like to stay on the safer side, and 
it has not been too much trouble. Yet. There are things in have in 
package.keywords, quite a lot actually.

Most packages are not a problem. Examples are games-fps/quake3, games-
fps/worldofpadman or games-strategy/widelands, which I want to use, but 
they are all keyworded. Or net-misc/youtube-dl, which changes quite 
frequently to adopt to youtube changes, and I want to always have the 
newest version. Or firefox 3.5. which took quite a while to go stable I 
think. Those are no problem.

There are other packages, which I unmask because of trouble with stable 
ones. One example is sys-apps/util-linux-2.15.1, which I need in order to 
make cfdisk work with large drives. Sometimes they pull in something else 
I have to unmask, but it's no big problem.

Then there is KDE4. I like it, but there are still so many bugs, so I want 
it to be a pretty new version from kde-testing. And I guess this is what 
is responsible for most of my problems, which make the @world update 
break. The current problem is with samba, apparently the monolithic 
package is being replaced by split ones, like with Qt. The new version is 
needed by kde-base/kdebase-kioslaves-4.3.3-r1 (4.3.3 is stable). I can 
mask this, and the @world update will work, with a minor complaint about 
the masked kioslaves.

I wonder if it's worth the trouble. I read here that running a full ~x86 
system would probably be easier. And I'd like to try, but while going from 
x86 to ~x86 is easy, the other way is quite hard, isn't it? If possible at 
all.

What about stability problems? I'd expect some, as the ~x86 stuff is not 
so fully tested. What are your experiences? And, do you also get blockers 
from time to time that are hard to solve?

I know this topic has been here a couple of times, sorry for bothering 
you, but I do not dare yet to make the switch.

Thanks for comments on this. I won't blame anybody for suggesting to make 
the switch in case I will regret this later :)

BTW, when I test this and enable ~x86 in make.conf, I first need to set 
the extras use flag for udev, and then I get these blockers. So I have to 
go to openrc, okay. And again trouble with my ati drivers. But maybe this 
will be over once I have completed the switch.

[blocks B     ]  <sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r11 ("<sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-
r11" is blocking sys-apps/openrc-0.5.2-r2)                                                                     
[blocks B     ] >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.0 (">=x11-base/xorg-
server-1.7.0" is blocking x11-drivers/ati-drivers-9.9-r2, x11-drivers/ati-
drivers-9.10)                                

Total: 611 packages (548 upgrades, 1 downgrade, 45 new, 13 in new slots, 4 
reinstalls, 1 interactive), Size of downloads: 1,114,567 kB                                                
Conflict: 15 blocks (1 unsatisfied)                                                        
Portage tree and overlays:                                                                 
 [0] /usr/portage/tree                                                                     
 [1] /usr/local/portage/layman/zugaina                                                     
 [2] /usr/local/portage/layman/kde-testing                                                 
 [3] /usr/local/portage/layman/science
 [4] /usr/local/portage

 * Error: The above package list contains packages which cannot be
 * installed at the same time on the same system.

  ('ebuild', '/', 'x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.1', 'merge') pulled in by
    >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.0.99 required by ('installed', '/', 'x11-
drivers/xf86-video-vesa-2.2.1', 'nomerge')
    >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.5.99.901 required by ('ebuild', '/', 'x11-
drivers/xf86-input-mouse-1.5.0', 'merge')
    >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.2[-minimal] required by ('installed', '/', 
'x11-drivers/xf86-video-ati-6.12.4', 'nomerge')
    (and 5 more)

  ('ebuild', '/', 'x11-drivers/ati-drivers-9.10', 'merge') pulled in by
    x11-drivers/ati-drivers:1 required by @world
    x11-drivers/ati-drivers required by ('ebuild', '/', 'x11-base/xorg-
drivers-1.7', 'merge')
    x11-drivers/ati-drivers required by @world

	Wonko

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 11 November 2009 17:21:26 Alex Schuster wrote:
> Hi there!

> I wonder if it's worth the trouble. I read here that running a full ~x86
> system would probably be easier. And I'd like to try, but while going from
> x86 to ~x86 is easy, the other way is quite hard, isn't it? If possible at
> all.

yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go back - 
easier to reinstall

> What about stability problems? I'd expect some, as the ~x86 stuff is not
> so fully tested. What are your experiences? And, do you also get blockers
> from time to time that are hard to solve?

I get a few problems now and then, mostly blockers from incompatible packages. 
But note that you are going to get exactly the same thing when those packages 
move to stable.

> BTW, when I test this and enable ~x86 in make.conf, I first need to set
> the extras use flag for udev, and then I get these blockers. So I have to
> go to openrc, okay. And again trouble with my ati drivers. But maybe this
> will be over once I have completed the switch.

There are several documents you should read first at gentoo.org, all related 
to upgrades. They are in the docs section, the page with the big long list:

- the switch to openrc
- the most recent X.org upgrade
- installing KDE4
- the horrendous amoun of work to get x and hal working if it doesn't work out 
the box

Deal with these blocks individually for best results:

> [blocks B     ]  <sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r11 ("<sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-
> r11" is blocking sys-apps/openrc-0.5.2-r2)

emerge -av1 openrc

read the elog message and do *exactly* what it says

> [blocks B     ] >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.0 (">=x11-base/xorg-
> server-1.7.0" is blocking x11-drivers/ati-drivers-9.9-r2, x11-drivers/ati-
> drivers-9.10)

unmerge ati-drivers, make sure VIDEO_CARDS is correct in make.conf and merge X

then remerge ALL your drivers. The elog tells you how to proceed

emerge -avuND world

Everything you run into will be solved using the normal fix-my-gentoo process 
:-)


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Willie Wong]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:04:44PM +0200, Penguin Lover Alan McKinnon squawked:
> On Wednesday 11 November 2009 17:21:26 Alex Schuster wrote:
> > Hi there!
> 
> > I wonder if it's worth the trouble. I read here that running a full ~x86
> > system would probably be easier. And I'd like to try, but while going from
> > x86 to ~x86 is easy, the other way is quite hard, isn't it? If possible at
> > all.
> 
> yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go back - 
> easier to reinstall

It is actually not that bad... if you are willing to wait a bit. 
Just keyword all currently installed packages (w. version number)
and change ACCEPT_KEYWORD to "x86". After a few months (if you are
lucky) or a few years (if you are unlucky), x86 will catch up and pass
the package versions you have installed. 

If you want it done yesterday, however, I agree that it is easier to
re-install x86. 

W
-- 
ZAPHOD	Hey, this rock...
FORD	Marble...
ZAPHOD	Marble...
FORD	Ice-covered marble...
ZAPHOD	Right... it's as slippery as... as... What's the 
slipperiest
	thing you can think of?
FORD	At the moment? This marble.
ZAPHOD	Right. This marble is as slippery as this marble.

- Zaphod and Ford trying to get a grip on things in 
Brontitall, Fit the Tenth. 
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 1069 days, 15:09

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Albert Hopkins]

Here's my take on this issue, and I've had this discussion with some
people on IRC as well and for the most part I think people will disagree
with me.

But they are wrong ;-)

I'm actually against mixing testing and stable branches.  Here's why.
People choose "stable" because they are under the impression that it's
somehow "safer" or "less troublesome" than "testing" (or what some
people call "unstable").  I'm not so sure I agree but that's not my
argument.  My argument is when these people go and then try to get the
"best of both worlds" by inter-marrying the branches.  From my
experience these people end up with less stable systems than choosing
either "stable" or "testing".  The problem is that they are mixing
software that were not tested or intended to run with each other.  And
they come into problems even people in the so-called "unstable" branch
don't experience.  Recent examples include Xorg and GNOME updates.  So
these people, and the majority of them are newbies, come to think Gentoo
is flaky but it's really their behavior.

Unfortunately the Official Handbook tends to encourage this behavior.
In theory this should be fine, but in practice it seems to produce
less-stable-than-unstable software setups, so I try to discourage people
from doing so.  Then they laugh at me.

But I've been in unstable forever.  I never use the stable branch
(except for testing ironically) and I remember the days when there was
no distinction between stable/testing.  Few times I've had problems with
an update and the solution is always simple: downgrade the package in
question.  When I had problems with the cups upgrade, I simply reported
a bug and downgraded cups.  When I had a problem with findutils, I
simply CC'ed myself on the bug and keyworded findutils to stable.  To me
that's been a lot easier than trying to figure out how to get stable
package A and unstable package B to agree on
inter-operability/configuration/dependencies/etc. 

So my advice is: pick and branch and stick with your own kind. It's far
fewer headaches in the long run.  And "unstable" isn't really unstable,
it's "untested".  There's a difference.

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Mark Knecht]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
> yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go back -
> easier to reinstall
>

Isn't there a lot more work to do to keep it up to date? Seems to me
testing packages are going to change more often and as not every one
of them will eventually become stable. Isn't it just a lot more
electrons burned to keep things emerge -DuN @world clean?

I run stable except for portage and eix, and then a couple of audio
apps I care about like Ardour and Jack which come from external
overlays and aren't tested by the mainline Gentoo guys anyway.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Roy Wright]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 604 bytes --]


On Nov 11, 2009, at 10:36 AM, Albert Hopkins wrote:

> So my advice is: pick and branch and stick with your own kind. It's  
> far
> fewer headaches in the long run.  And "unstable" isn't really  
> unstable,
> it's "untested".  There's a difference.
>

Also keep in mind that it's the ebuild that is "untested".  The  
package is usually what upstream has released as stable.

My advice is if you are willing to upgrade at least weekly then go  
"untested", if you are willing to upgrade at least monthly, then go  
"stable", else really be willing to work thru some hard upgrade  
scenarios.

HTH,
Roy

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1020 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Mittwoch 11 November 2009, Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
>  wrote: <SNIP>
> 
> > yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go
> > back - easier to reinstall
> 
> Isn't there a lot more work to do to keep it up to date? Seems to me
> testing packages are going to change more often and as not every one
> of them will eventually become stable. Isn't it just a lot more
> electrons burned to keep things emerge -DuN @world clean?
> 
> I run stable except for portage and eix, and then a couple of audio
> apps I care about like Ardour and Jack which come from external
> overlays and aren't tested by the mainline Gentoo guys anyway.
> 
> - Mark
> 

not really. there isn't such a big difference between the daily stabilization 
and the daily version bump. so you might emerge a few packages more in the 
same time frame, but the difference is not that big.

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Roy Wright schrieb:

> Also keep in mind that it's the ebuild that is "untested".  The package
> is usually what upstream has released as stable.

I haven't yet looked at it that way, good point.

> My advice is if you are willing to upgrade at least weekly then go
> "untested", if you are willing to upgrade at least monthly, then go
> "stable", else really be willing to work thru some hard upgrade scenarios.

Hmm, and this now as I just got somehow happy with my strange mixture of
stable and unstable ;-)

I am now looking at some

# ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world

;-)

Thanks, greetings, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[KH]

Alex Schuster schrieb:
> Hi there!
> [snip]Or net-misc/youtube-dl, which changes quite
> frequently to adopt to youtube changes, and I want to always have the 
> newest version. [snip]

Hi,

see bgo 286366 and report you are fine with it. Maybe it will become 
stable, then.

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=286366

Even better, also report a new bug as stablrq for youtube-dl-2009.09.13

kh

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[KH]

Albert Hopkins schrieb:
> [snip]
> But they are wrong ;-)
> 
> I'm actually against mixing testing and stable branches.  Here's why.
> People choose "stable" because they are under the impression that it's
> somehow "safer" or "less troublesome" than "testing" (or what some
> people call "unstable").  I'm not so sure I agree but that's not my
> argument.  My argument is when these people go and then try to get the
> "best of both worlds" by inter-marrying the branches.  From my
> experience these people end up with less stable systems than choosing
> either "stable" or "testing".  The problem is that they are mixing
> software that were not tested or intended to run with each other.  And
> they come into problems even people in the so-called "unstable" branch
> don't experience.  Recent examples include Xorg and GNOME updates.  So
> these people, and the majority of them are newbies, come to think Gentoo
> is flaky but it's really their behavior.
> 
> [snip]

Hi,

this for shure is not right, if you are only running few testing 
programs. I'd never run ~amd64 just for youtube-dl to be working fine.

kh

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

whatever you decide to do. Please turn on the buildpkg option in make.conf. It 
is a GOOD THING on stable, but even more so on unstable. Will save you a lot 
of blood sweat and tears.

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Stefan G. Weichinger schrieb:

> I am now looking at some
> 
> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world

This gives me 464 packages (441 upgrades, 15 new, 6 in new slots, 2
reinstalls, 4 uninstalls) ... phew ... maybe tomorrow ...

;-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Marcus Wanner]

On 11/11/2009 5:47 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Stefan G. Weichinger schrieb:
>
>   
>> I am now looking at some
>>
>> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world
>>     
>
> This gives me 464 packages (441 upgrades, 15 new, 6 in new slots, 2
> reinstalls, 4 uninstalls) ... phew ... maybe tomorrow ...
>
> ;-)
>   
How 'bout overnight :p

That's what I'm doing, after reading that bit about the ebuilds and not 
the packages being unstable :D

Marcus

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 513 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:47:00 +0100, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:

> > I am now looking at some
> > 
> > # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world  
> 
> This gives me 464 packages (441 upgrades, 15 new, 6 in new slots, 2
> reinstalls, 4 uninstalls) ... phew ... maybe tomorrow ...

I'd emerge @system first, then reboot and make sure everything works
correctly before updating the rest of @world.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Downloading - A quick way of catching a virus from anywhere in the world.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Marcus Wanner schrieb:

> How 'bout overnight :p
> 
> That's what I'm doing, after reading that bit about the ebuilds and not
> the packages being unstable :D

Sure, me too :)

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Neil Bothwick schrieb:

> I'd emerge @system first, then reboot and make sure everything works
> correctly before updating the rest of @world.

Good point, yes ... hmm, it was half way through @world ... now I do
@system and will see what happens. Thanks for the hint, I should have
thought of that.

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 11 November 2009 18:36:23 Albert Hopkins wrote:
> So my advice is: pick and branch and stick with your own kind. It's far
> fewer headaches in the long run.  And "unstable" isn't really unstable,
> it's "untested".  There's a difference.
> 

Actually it's not "untested", it's "still being tested". There's a difference.

:-)


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 11 November 2009 19:51:26 Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
>  wrote: <SNIP>
> 
> > yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go
> > back - easier to reinstall
> 
> Isn't there a lot more work to do to keep it up to date? Seems to me
> testing packages are going to change more often and as not every one
> of them will eventually become stable. Isn't it just a lot more
> electrons burned to keep things emerge -DuN @world clean?

Yes, ~arch is higher-touch than arch so ~arch users will emerge lots more 
stuff.

Is it worth it? That depends on the reason why the box is there and only it's 
admin can decide. And everyone's reasoning will be different.

I run ~arch everything because

1. I'm a geek
2. I like to fiddle
3. I can have as much bandwidth as I want
4. I can test/use new softwares locally before rolling it out to my production 
machines
5. I can warn others using more stable OSes about deep changes coming down the 
tubes (X for instance. RHEL users are in for a big surprise sometime in the 
next 6 months to 5 years...)




-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Thursday 12 November 2009 00:12:06 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Roy Wright schrieb:
> > Also keep in mind that it's the ebuild that is "untested".  The package
> > is usually what upstream has released as stable.
> 
> I haven't yet looked at it that way, good point.
> 
> > My advice is if you are willing to upgrade at least weekly then go
> > "untested", if you are willing to upgrade at least monthly, then go
> > "stable", else really be willing to work thru some hard upgrade
> > scenarios.
> 
> Hmm, and this now as I just got somehow happy with my strange mixture of
> stable and unstable ;-)
> 
> I am now looking at some
> 
> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world


Good god, please don't ever do that.

If you don't know why it's a terrible idea, then you *really* should not be 
doing it


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Donnerstag 12 November 2009, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> 5. I can warn others using more stable OSes about deep changes coming down
>  the tubes (X for instance. RHEL users are in for a big surprise sometime
>  in the next 6 months to 5 years...)
> 

friends using stable ask me if they hit a problem. Because most of the time I 
hit the same problem a couple of weeks earlier...

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Marcus Wanner]

On 11/12/2009 5:05 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Thursday 12 November 2009 00:12:06 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>   
>> Roy Wright schrieb:
>>     
>>> Also keep in mind that it's the ebuild that is "untested".  The package
>>> is usually what upstream has released as stable.
>>>       
>> I haven't yet looked at it that way, good point.
>>
>>     
>>> My advice is if you are willing to upgrade at least weekly then go
>>> "untested", if you are willing to upgrade at least monthly, then go
>>> "stable", else really be willing to work thru some hard upgrade
>>> scenarios.
>>>       
>> Hmm, and this now as I just got somehow happy with my strange mixture of
>> stable and unstable ;-)
>>
>> I am now looking at some
>>
>> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world
>>     
>
>
> Good god, please don't ever do that.
>
> If you don't know why it's a terrible idea, then you *really* should not be 
> doing it
>   
Yes, temporarily setting ~arch is incredibly bad. Even I know that :p.

Marcus

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alex Schuster]

Thanks for your replies, guys! They have been helpful. I think I know what 
to do now. And that is... wait. Until I have some time to spare for this. 
Then, after a backup, I will perform the migration. Now let's see that 
this openrc and baselayout-2 is that I have read people talking about for 
quite a while here. Emerging more stuff is okay, also small problems here 
and there. Generally having newer stuff is nice and geekier. I also have 
some other Gentoo machines I maintain, and there are two people whose 
machines I look after, so it may help if I see new problems first. The 
eix-test-obsolete will be much shorter for sure!

Again, thanks for the nice discussion.

	Wonko

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alex Schuster]

KH writes:

> Alex Schuster schrieb:

> > [snip]
> > Or net-misc/youtube-dl, which changes quite
> > frequently to adopt to youtube changes, and I want to always have the
> > newest version. [snip]

> see bgo 286366 and report you are fine with it. Maybe it will become
> stable, then.
> 
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=286366

Did so. I'd like all newer versions to become stable soon, or even as soon 
as they are released, because it seems the older version won't work 
anymore with Google then anyway.

	Wonko

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Marcus Wanner schrieb:
> On 11/12/2009 5:05 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>> On Thursday 12 November 2009 00:12:06 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
>>> I am now looking at some
>>>
>>> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world
>>
>> Good god, please don't ever do that.
>>
>> If you don't know why it's a terrible idea, then you *really* should
>> not be doing it
>>   
> Yes, temporarily setting ~arch is incredibly bad. Even I know that :p.

I did *not* do that. I ran that command to just get an impression of
what changing $ACCEPT_KEYWORDS would do.

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Stefan G. Weichinger schrieb:
> Neil Bothwick schrieb:
> 
>> I'd emerge @system first, then reboot and make sure everything works
>> correctly before updating the rest of @world.
> 
> Good point, yes ... hmm, it was half way through @world ... now I do
> @system and will see what happens. Thanks for the hint, I should have
> thought of that.

I interrupted my @world and finished @system first, rebooted ok, then
finished @world, added some revdep-rebuild-runs on the way (some
stoppers inbetween, but nothing too serious) ... now I am through and
have my complete ~amd64-box.

So far nearly everything seems to work (only half an hour usage so far,
we'll see ...). I will add another reboot now and have a look at the
minor issues.

Additional thought: /etc/portage/package.keywords should be useless now, hm?

Greets, Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 13 November 2009 00:36:11 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Marcus Wanner schrieb:
> > On 11/12/2009 5:05 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> >> On Thursday 12 November 2009 00:12:06 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> >>> I am now looking at some
> >>>
> >>> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world
> >>
> >> Good god, please don't ever do that.
> >>
> >> If you don't know why it's a terrible idea, then you *really* should
> >> not be doing it
> >
> > Yes, temporarily setting ~arch is incredibly bad. Even I know that :p.
> 
> I did *not* do that. I ran that command to just get an impression of
> what changing $ACCEPT_KEYWORDS would do 

in that case emerge -p is better than emerge -a

just in case you hit enter by mistake then walk away...
> 

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 13 November 2009 00:46:00 Stefan G. Weichinger wrote:
> Stefan G. Weichinger schrieb:
> > Neil Bothwick schrieb:
> >> I'd emerge @system first, then reboot and make sure everything works
> >> correctly before updating the rest of @world.
> >
> > Good point, yes ... hmm, it was half way through @world ... now I do
> > @system and will see what happens. Thanks for the hint, I should have
> > thought of that.
> 
> I interrupted my @world and finished @system first, rebooted ok, then
> finished @world, added some revdep-rebuild-runs on the way (some
> stoppers inbetween, but nothing too serious) ... now I am through and
> have my complete ~amd64-box.
> 
> So far nearly everything seems to work (only half an hour usage so far,
> we'll see ...). I will add another reboot now and have a look at the
> minor issues.
> 
> Additional thought: /etc/portage/package.keywords should be useless now,
>  hm?

No, you will still need it for ebuilds that having missing keywords. For 
everything else, it's duplication. Test if you need it by:

- moving the file out the way
- emerge -pv @installed

If you get any messages at all before the list of packages, you have stuff to 
fix


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Joshua Murphy]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> wrote:
> Stefan G. Weichinger schrieb:
>> Neil Bothwick schrieb:
>>
>>> I'd emerge @system first, then reboot and make sure everything works
>>> correctly before updating the rest of @world.
>>
>> Good point, yes ... hmm, it was half way through @world ... now I do
>> @system and will see what happens. Thanks for the hint, I should have
>> thought of that.
>
> I interrupted my @world and finished @system first, rebooted ok, then
> finished @world, added some revdep-rebuild-runs on the way (some
> stoppers inbetween, but nothing too serious) ... now I am through and
> have my complete ~amd64-box.
>
> So far nearly everything seems to work (only half an hour usage so far,
> we'll see ...). I will add another reboot now and have a look at the
> minor issues.
>
> Additional thought: /etc/portage/package.keywords should be useless now, hm?
>
> Greets, Stefan

Useless? well, not exactly. ~amd64 marked packages in it are
redundant, but every box I put wine on runs git builds
(=app-emulation/wine-9999 in the portage tree), and as such has to
have a "=app-emulation/wine-9999 **" line in package.keywords to get
around being "masked by missing keyword." Of course, this also
involves me knowing full well that, in the process of any rebuild of
wine, I could end up with a terribly broken install and potential data
loss, as is true of running anything from sources that aren't even
being released as "stable" even by the upstream developers.

-- 
Poison [BLX]
Joshua M. Murphy

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Alan McKinnon schrieb:

>>>>> # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64" emerge -avuDN world
>>>> Good god, please don't ever do that.
>> I ran that command to just get an impression of
>> what changing $ACCEPT_KEYWORDS would do 
> 
> in that case emerge -p is better than emerge -a
> 
> just in case you hit enter by mistake then walk away...

ok ... lesson learned, thanks ...

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 13 November 2009 01:21:49 Joshua Murphy wrote:
> Useless? well, not exactly. ~amd64 marked packages in it are
> redundant, but every box I put wine on runs git builds
> (=app-emulation/wine-9999 in the portage tree), and as such has to
> have a "=app-emulation/wine-9999 **" line in package.keywords to get
> around being "masked by missing keyword." Of course, this also
> involves me knowing full well that, in the process of any rebuild of
> wine, I could end up with a terribly broken install and potential data
> loss, as is true of running anything from sources that aren't even
> being released as "stable" even by the upstream developers.
> 

How do you find latest wine git commits compares to the fortnightly snapshots?

I use Alexandre's snapshots almost as soon as they are released, I figure I 
can wait the max two weeks to get a latest feature


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Joshua Murphy]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday 13 November 2009 01:21:49 Joshua Murphy wrote:
>> Useless? well, not exactly. ~amd64 marked packages in it are
>> redundant, but every box I put wine on runs git builds
>> (=app-emulation/wine-9999 in the portage tree), and as such has to
>> have a "=app-emulation/wine-9999 **" line in package.keywords to get
>> around being "masked by missing keyword." Of course, this also
>> involves me knowing full well that, in the process of any rebuild of
>> wine, I could end up with a terribly broken install and potential data
>> loss, as is true of running anything from sources that aren't even
>> being released as "stable" even by the upstream developers.
>>
>
> How do you find latest wine git commits compares to the fortnightly snapshots?
>
> I use Alexandre's snapshots almost as soon as they are released, I figure I
> can wait the max two weeks to get a latest feature
>
>
> --
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

I only bother rebuilding wine when I hit a problem, or I'm doing an
otherwise fairly big set of upgrades to everything else on the system,
so I don't keep it running on the 'latest', though I will mention I
find it very rare that it gives me even the slightest problem that I
can blame on Wine itself.

-- 
Poison [BLX]
Joshua M. Murphy

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[daid kahl]

> I wonder if it's worth the trouble. I read here that running a full ~x86
> system would probably be easier. And I'd like to try, but while going from
> x86 to ~x86 is easy, the other way is quite hard, isn't it? If possible at
> all.

I just wanted to throw my two-cents in here, although much has been said.

I was running ~x86 for about two years.  Then I waited 6 months and
was able to shift to x86 with only a few things in the keywords.  (For
example, I had already shifted to openrc and I didn't see the point in
shifting back and then back-once-again.)  However, for these cases, I
almost exclusively keyword <= version numbers, so that, in theory, I
will eventually hit x86 minus a very few packages (for example, the
ones that there is no x86 version available).

But honestly, I've been nearly stable (x86) for a couple months now,
and I can't say that the system seems any different.  Problems still
crop up, and I still have to deal with them.

As one poster mentioned, when I was running ~x86 and an ebuild was
annoying, I'd just emerge the stable one.  This was a solution for 90%
of the things I couldn't google up a bug report on.  But the problems
I've hit lately are taking me a lot more time.  It could be the mixing
of x86 ~and x86, even though the mixture is nearly all x86.

While shifitng from ~x86 to x86 is 'harder' than the other way around,
basically the way you're shifting is, by-and-large, just waiting for
x86 to catch up to ~x86.

Regards,
daid

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alex Schuster]

Some time ago, Alan McKinnon wrote:

> On Wednesday 11 November 2009 17:21:26 Alex Schuster wrote:

> > I wonder if it's worth the trouble. I read here that running a full
> > ~x86 system would probably be easier. And I'd like to try, but while
> > going from x86 to ~x86 is easy, the other way is quite hard, isn't
> > it? If possible at all.
> 
> yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go
> back - easier to reinstall

I hope I will not have to do so :)  But I have a backup, just in case.
BTW, why would the downgrade be so painful? Is this because of the 
impossible glibc downgrade, or are there even more problems?


> > BTW, when I test this and enable ~x86 in make.conf, I first need to
> > set the extras use flag for udev, and then I get these blockers. So I
> > have to go to openrc, okay. And again trouble with my ati drivers.
> > But maybe this will be over once I have completed the switch.
> 
> There are several documents you should read first at gentoo.org, all
> related to upgrades. They are in the docs section, the page with the
> big long list:
> 
> - the switch to openrc

Done. Did not yet reboot, though :)

> - the most recent X.org upgrade

Not done, that does not work with ati-drivers.

> - installing KDE4

Already have that.

> - the horrendous amoun of work to get x and hal working if it doesn't
>   work out the box

The horror.... but  think not much will change here.

> Deal with these blocks individually for best results:
> > [blocks B     ]  <sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86-r11
> > ("<sys-apps/sysvinit-2.86- r11" is blocking sys-apps/openrc-0.5.2-r2)
> 
> emerge -av1 openrc
> 
> read the elog message and do *exactly* what it says

I think I was just able to update baselayout. Was I really liked was that 
I did not have so much to do, things were done automatically, like 
migrating new services into the boot runlevel. Nice work!

> > [blocks B     ] >=x11-base/xorg-server-1.7.0 (">=x11-base/xorg-
> > server-1.7.0" is blocking x11-drivers/ati-drivers-9.9-r2,
> > x11-drivers/ati- drivers-9.10)
> 
> unmerge ati-drivers, make sure VIDEO_CARDS is correct in make.conf and
> merge X then remerge ALL your drivers. The elog tells you how to proceed

Um, no. ati-drivers is not compatible with xorg-server-1.7, and after I 
was not able to get the radeon driver to work (I tried... oh how I tried), 
I keep my old X.org. I put this into package.mask (got most of it from bug 
#290739 [1]), maybe I could trim it some more:

>=x11-base/xorg-server-1.7
#>=x11-proto/xcmiscproto-1.2.0
#>=x11-proto/bigreqsproto-1.1.0
#>=x11-proto/xf86driproto-2.1.0
#>=x11-proto/xf86bigfontproto-1.2.0
>=x11-base/xorg-drivers-1.7
>=x11-proto/xextproto-7.1.1
>=x11-proto/fixesproto-4.1.1
>=x11-proto/inputproto-2.0
>=x11-libs/libX11-1.3.2
>=x11-libs/libXext-1.1.1
>=x11-libs/libXi-1.3
>=x11-apps/xinput-1.5.0
>=x11-proto/xf86vidmodeproto-2.3
>=x11-libs/libXxf86vm-1.1.0
>=x11-proto/recordproto-1.14
>=x11-libs/libXtst-1.1.0
>=x11-proto/scrnsaverproto-1.2.0
>=x11-libs/libXScrnSaver-1.2.0
>=x11-proto/xineramaproto-1.2
>=x11-libs/libXinerama-1.1
>=x11-proto/xf86dgaproto-2.1
>=x11-libs/libXxf86dga-1.1.1

>=media-libs/mesa-7.6

Looks ugly, but as long as my package.mask will be smaller than my current 
package.keywords...

> emerge -avuND world

I had to remove samba and poppler to resolve blockers, but I'm emerging 
@system now. Hooray!


Now I have a final question (for the moment). What is this ~x86 called? 
Writing is easy, 4 characters, but how is this pronounced? Tilde-ex-
eightysix / tilde-arch? Or is it just testing? The problem came up when I 
was at the Chaos Communication Congress in Berlin and talked to the guys 
at the Gentoo desk.

Oh, dev-libs/klibc-1.5.15-r1 just failed to build. #285355 [2] suggests to 
disable distcc, and yes, this does the trick. Strange, but, whatever. 107 
packages to go now.

	Wonko

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/290739
[2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=285355

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Friday 15 January 2010 15:04:12 Alex Schuster wrote:
> Some time ago, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Wednesday 11 November 2009 17:21:26 Alex Schuster wrote:
> > > I wonder if it's worth the trouble. I read here that running a full
> > > ~x86 system would probably be easier. And I'd like to try, but while
> > > going from x86 to ~x86 is easy, the other way is quite hard, isn't
> > > it? If possible at all.
> >
> > yes, it is easier to just go ~x86. Yes, it is very very very hard to go
> > back - easier to reinstall
> 
> I hope I will not have to do so :)  But I have a backup, just in case.
> BTW, why would the downgrade be so painful? Is this because of the
> impossible glibc downgrade, or are there even more problems?

glibc is the one thing that makes it almost impossible. Everything else just 
makes it very very hard.

[snip]

> Now I have a final question (for the moment). What is this ~x86 called?
> Writing is easy, 4 characters, but how is this pronounced? Tilde-ex-
> eightysix / tilde-arch? Or is it just testing? The problem came up when I
> was at the Chaos Communication Congress in Berlin and talked to the guys
> at the Gentoo desk.

any of those will do. Even "unstable arch".

Anyone with more than a few days experience with gentoo will know what you are 
talking about.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Going ~x86?

[Alex Schuster]

Hi there!

It's done! I'm at ~x86 now. The upgrade went quite smooth - had to resolve 
some blockers, and mask the new x.org 1.7 because it does not work at all 
with ati-drivers.

**BUT:** After rebooting, I ran into a very nasty KDE4 bug. All 
authentication dialogs did not work. So I had no KDE wallet, no kmail, no 
kopete, no webmail... now this was annoying! Must be some strange side 
effect, I do not think anything of KDE itself had been updated.

I spent quite some time trying to solve this. Without an existing ~/.kde4 
directory, it worked, but all of my .kde4 backups (I have lots, I make one 
whenever I save the session, because this does not work sometimes) had the 
problem. So I searched for the file in ~/.kde4 that was responsible for 
it, and finally I found .kde4/share/config/kdeglobals. And, more 
prrecisely, this setting:

[Passwords]
EchoMode=ThreeStars

I commented this out, and all is working again. Yes, I will file a bug 
report upstream.

This kind of bug is what made me not switch to KDE for a long time. The 
possibility of suddenly having a little problem which makes the whole KDE 
thing unusable until solved.

	Wonko