[gentoo-user] alsaconf not setting oss emulation

[gentoo-user] alsaconf not setting oss emulation

[Nick Rout]

alsaconf from alsa-utils-1.09a is setting up the
barest /etc/modules.d/alsa file:

nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ cat alsa
# --- BEGIN: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
# --- ALSACONF version 1.0.9a ---
options snd  device_mode=0666
alias snd-card-0 snd-via82xx
alias sound-slot-0 snd-via82xx
# --- END: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---


As a result the oss emulation modules are not loaded:

nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ lsmod|grep snd
snd_seq                55312  0
snd_via82xx            28064  0
snd_ac97_codec         77432  1 snd_via82xx
snd_pcm                95496  2 snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec
snd_timer              26372  2 snd_seq,snd_pcm
snd_page_alloc         10116  2 snd_via82xx,snd_pcm
snd_mpu401_uart         8320  1 snd_via82xx
snd_rawmidi            25888  1 snd_mpu401_uart
snd_seq_device          8972  2 snd_seq,snd_rawmidi
snd                    58212  8
snd_seq,snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec,snd_pcm,snd_timer,snd_mpu401_uart,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq_device


This behaviour seems to have changed with alsa-utils 1.09a which seems
to have run alsaconf when it was emerged, even though I didn't ask it
to.

Can anyone explain this annoyance?

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] SOLVED alsaconf not setting oss emulation

[Nick Rout]

Never mind I just updated /etc/conf.d/alsasound and noted it's new
setting:

# ENABLE_OSS_EMUL:
# Do you want to enable in-kernel oss emulation?
# no - Do not load oss emul drivers
# yes - Load oss emul drivers if they're found

ENABLE_OSS_EMUL="yes"


On Sun, 2005-08-07 at 11:40 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
> alsaconf from alsa-utils-1.09a is setting up the
> barest /etc/modules.d/alsa file:
> 
> nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ cat alsa
> # --- BEGIN: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
> # --- ALSACONF version 1.0.9a ---
> options snd  device_mode=0666
> alias snd-card-0 snd-via82xx
> alias sound-slot-0 snd-via82xx
> # --- END: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
> 
> 
> As a result the oss emulation modules are not loaded:
> 
> nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ lsmod|grep snd
> snd_seq                55312  0
> snd_via82xx            28064  0
> snd_ac97_codec         77432  1 snd_via82xx
> snd_pcm                95496  2 snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec
> snd_timer              26372  2 snd_seq,snd_pcm
> snd_page_alloc         10116  2 snd_via82xx,snd_pcm
> snd_mpu401_uart         8320  1 snd_via82xx
> snd_rawmidi            25888  1 snd_mpu401_uart
> snd_seq_device          8972  2 snd_seq,snd_rawmidi
> snd                    58212  8
> snd_seq,snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec,snd_pcm,snd_timer,snd_mpu401_uart,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq_device
> 
> 
> This behaviour seems to have changed with alsa-utils 1.09a which seems
> to have run alsaconf when it was emerged, even though I didn't ask it
> to.
> 
> Can anyone explain this annoyance?
> 
> -- 
> Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>
> 
-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] alsaconf not setting oss emulation

[Christoph Eckert]

> alsaconf from alsa-utils-1.09a is setting up the
> barest /etc/modules.d/alsa file:
>
> nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ cat alsa
> # --- BEGIN: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
> # --- ALSACONF version 1.0.9a ---
> options snd  device_mode=0666
> alias snd-card-0 snd-via82xx
> alias sound-slot-0 snd-via82xx
> # --- END: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
>
>
> As a result the oss emulation modules are not loaded:
>
> nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ lsmod|grep snd
> snd_seq                55312  0
> snd_via82xx            28064  0
> snd_ac97_codec         77432  1 snd_via82xx
> snd_pcm                95496  2 snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec
> snd_timer              26372  2 snd_seq,snd_pcm
> snd_page_alloc         10116  2 snd_via82xx,snd_pcm
> snd_mpu401_uart         8320  1 snd_via82xx
> snd_rawmidi            25888  1 snd_mpu401_uart
> snd_seq_device          8972  2 snd_seq,snd_rawmidi
> snd                    58212  8
> snd_seq,snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec,snd_pcm,snd_timer,snd_mp
>u401_uart,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq_device
>
>
> This behaviour seems to have changed with alsa-utils 1.09a
> which seems to have run alsaconf when it was emerged, even
> though I didn't ask it to.
>
> Can anyone explain this annoyance?

alsaconf is a very useful but old script.

I don't know if the behaviour has changed, but I guess that 
noone has changed alsaconf itself.

I have the following lines in my modules file:

alias /dev/mixer snd-mixer-oss
alias /dev/dsp snd-pcm-oss
alias /dev/midi snd-seq-oss

AFAIK it is necessary to have OSS emulation enabled in the 
kernel.


Best regards


    ce



-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] alsaconf not setting oss emulation

[Nick Rout]

On Sun, 2005-08-07 at 02:30 +0200, Christoph Eckert wrote:
> > alsaconf from alsa-utils-1.09a is setting up the
> > barest /etc/modules.d/alsa file:
> >
> > nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ cat alsa
> > # --- BEGIN: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
> > # --- ALSACONF version 1.0.9a ---
> > options snd  device_mode=0666
> > alias snd-card-0 snd-via82xx
> > alias sound-slot-0 snd-via82xx
> > # --- END: Generated by ALSACONF, do not edit. ---
> >
> >
> > As a result the oss emulation modules are not loaded:
> >
> > nick@sf /etc/modules.d $ lsmod|grep snd
> > snd_seq                55312  0
> > snd_via82xx            28064  0
> > snd_ac97_codec         77432  1 snd_via82xx
> > snd_pcm                95496  2 snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec
> > snd_timer              26372  2 snd_seq,snd_pcm
> > snd_page_alloc         10116  2 snd_via82xx,snd_pcm
> > snd_mpu401_uart         8320  1 snd_via82xx
> > snd_rawmidi            25888  1 snd_mpu401_uart
> > snd_seq_device          8972  2 snd_seq,snd_rawmidi
> > snd                    58212  8
> > snd_seq,snd_via82xx,snd_ac97_codec,snd_pcm,snd_timer,snd_mp
> >u401_uart,snd_rawmidi,snd_seq_device
> >
> >
> > This behaviour seems to have changed with alsa-utils 1.09a
> > which seems to have run alsaconf when it was emerged, even
> > though I didn't ask it to.
> >
> > Can anyone explain this annoyance?

see my "SOLVED" message, it is a new config option.

> 
> alsaconf is a very useful but old script.
> 

although it may be old that doesn't mean it is not being developed. The
version in alsa-utils-1.09a is different to the version in 1.08

> I don't know if the behaviour has changed, but I guess that 
> noone has changed alsaconf itself.
> 
> I have the following lines in my modules file:
> 
> alias /dev/mixer snd-mixer-oss
> alias /dev/dsp snd-pcm-oss
> alias /dev/midi snd-seq-oss
> 


you shouldn't need them anymore it seems.

> AFAIK it is necessary to have OSS emulation enabled in the 
> kernel.

I hadn't changed the kernel.

> 
> 
> Best regards
> 
> 
>     ce
> 
> 
> 
-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 601 bytes --]

Hi all,

This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants  
that share certain characteristics.

I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good  
job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,  
such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.

Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly  
support the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any  
one have any perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point- 
of-view? Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?

Thanks all,
Paul

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1534 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Paul Hoy wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants that 
> share certain characteristics. 
> 
> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good job 
> at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases, such as 
> Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc. 
> 
> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly support 
> the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one have 
> any perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? 
> Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
> 
> Thanks all,
> Paul

Hi Paul,

Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what packages specifically?  Do you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at packages.gentoo.org)?

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Joe Menola]

On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly support
> the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one have any
> perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does
> anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?

I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up pretty much 
equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands down. IMO

google>"gentoo"=3,990,000 hits
google>"lfs"=877,000 hits

-jm





-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 337 bytes --]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:

> I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
> pretty much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands
> down. IMO

What about package management?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"Bother," said Pooh, as the media exposed his sexual depravity.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 690 bytes --]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:

> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good  
> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,  
> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.

Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is always up to date. If you want to
run the latest of everything you will need to run a ~arch system. There
are no releases for Gentoo beyond the installation live CDs. Once
installed, provided you keep up to date, there is no difference between a
system installed three years ago and one installed yesterday.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Joe Menola]

On Sunday August 14 2005 4:22 pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
> > I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
> > pretty much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands
> > down. IMO
>
> What about package management?

Good point, since LFS has none built in, I guess Gentoo wins here as well.

-jm
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Nick Rout]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500
Joe Menola wrote:

> On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
> > Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly support
> > the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one have any
> > perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does
> > anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
> 
> I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up pretty much 
> equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands down. IMO

Well given that LFS is nothing but documentation ( along howto), that
doesn't leave much...

> 
> google>"gentoo"=3,990,000 hits
> google>"lfs"=877,000 hits
> 
> -jm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Nick Rout]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what packages specifically?  Do
you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
packages.gentoo.org)?

Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.


> 
> Zac

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Holly Bostick]

Nick Rout schreef:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
> Zac Medico wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi Paul,
>>
>>Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what packages specifically?  Do
> 
> you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
> packages.gentoo.org)?
> 
> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
> 
OK, I'll bite. What then do you consider "a release of a recent version"
to be constituted from?

If it's been released upstream, and it's in Portage a couple of hours
later, so I can install it, I don't know what more you could want....
what, you want a Mandrake- (or worse, still, Debian) -style wait of
months before you can use the upstream version?

I'll grant you that it's sometimes a little bumpy... but then you might
as well be running Slack or something (not that there's anything wrong
with Slackware except the appalling package management).

But since I have yet to find a problem I couldn't solve in a few
minutes-- and if I couldn't, it was clearly a dev issue/b.g.o issue,
where I could generally count on it to be solved within hours, if not
prior to my discovery-- I really can't quite see what you're on about.

What would be different in the Gentoo you envision?

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Joe Menola]

On Sunday August 14 2005 4:37 pm, Nick Rout wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500
>
> Joe Menola wrote:
> > On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
> > > Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
> > > support the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any
> > > one have any perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo
> > > point-of-view? Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
> >
> > I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up pretty
> > much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands down. IMO
>
> Well given that LFS is nothing but documentation ( along howto), that
> doesn't leave much...

When an app doesn't compile, the 1 page howto doesn't help much, seeing as how 
you probably already followed it.

-jm

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:

> What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?

gcc4

since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies got itchy.

Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora...
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Joe Menola]

On Sunday August 14 2005 4:38 pm, Nick Rout wrote:
> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.

Can you name any version of Linux where version upgrades go directly into 
stable? 
It's all about choice...the "latest n greatest" or "tried n true". 
And that's how it is in any flavor of Linux I've tried, LFS  included.

-jm
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 659 bytes --]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:

> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.

They're not "unstable", they are "testing", and that only applies to the
ebuild itself, not the upstream package. If you want the latest versions,
you need to run ~arch. Any distro that puts brand new packages (with the
exception of security fixes) into its stable package tree has thrown all
concept of QA out of the window.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 30: Business ethics

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Joe Menola wrote:

> On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
>
>> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly  
>> support
>> the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one  
>> have any
>> perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does
>> anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
>>
>
> I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up  
> pretty much
> equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands down. IMO
>
> google>"gentoo"=3,990,000 hits
> google>"lfs"=877,000 hits
>
> -jm
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

Hi Joe,

What about the LFS community - did you find it helpful?

Of course, the answer is probably objective. Developer types may not  
have to rely so much on community whereas those who have the great  
capacity to take forever to understand the point, like myself,  
require a good community.

Also, I agree with you that the Gentoo documentation (most of it) is  
excellent; I've printed, and have read most of it.

One more question, and it's the most obvious. You said that Gentoo  
and LFS are more or less equal. So, that begs the question: what  
persuaded you to stick with Gentoo?

Thanks ,
Paul
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Holly Bostick wrote:
> 
> What would be different in the Gentoo you envision?
> 

I'll bit too. ;-)  On the gentoo-dev list I've heard talk of a QA feedback system so that users can report WORKSFORME on unstable packages.  This will provide the data necessary to help know when packages should be marked stable.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:33 PM, Joe Menola wrote:

> On Sunday August 14 2005 4:22 pm, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 16:05:22 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
>>
>>> I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
>>> pretty much equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands
>>> down. IMO
>>>
>>
>> What about package management?
>>
>
> Good point, since LFS has none built in, I guess Gentoo wins here  
> as well.
>
> -jm
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

Hi guys,

Actually, BLFS has six different package management options.

Paul
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Joe Menola]

On Sunday August 14 2005 5:43 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Joe Menola wrote:
> > On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
> >> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
> >> support
> >> the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one
> >> have any
> >> perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does
> >> anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
> >
> > I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
> > pretty much
> > equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands down. IMO
> >
> > google>"gentoo"=3,990,000 hits
> > google>"lfs"=877,000 hits
> >
> > -jm

>
> Hi Joe,
>
> What about the LFS community - did you find it helpful?
>
> Of course, the answer is probably objective. Developer types may not
> have to rely so much on community whereas those who have the great
> capacity to take forever to understand the point, like myself,
> require a good community.
>
> Also, I agree with you that the Gentoo documentation (most of it) is
> excellent; I've printed, and have read most of it.
>
> One more question, and it's the most obvious. You said that Gentoo
> and LFS are more or less equal. So, that begs the question: what
> persuaded you to stick with Gentoo?
>
> Thanks ,
> Paul

The LFs community was very helpful, I couldn't have built a working system 
without them. :)
I just find it easier when Goggle finds other documented problems that match 
mine. The size of the Gentoo user base makes this much more likely with 
Gentoo vs LFS.
To answer the obvious...Gentoo is easier to build then LFS. LFS's style of 
package by package installing is great for learning the workings of Linux, 
and I wouldn't trade-in my experience with LFS for anything. But starting 
from scratch with LFS and obtaining a working Kde desktop took me (from 
memory) a few weeks to build. With Gentoo, I was there in a few days thanks 
to "emerge kde-meta".

-jm
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Nick Rout]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:48:22 -0700
Zac Medico wrote:

> Holly Bostick wrote:
> > 
> > What would be different in the Gentoo you envision?
> > 
> 
> I'll bit too. ;-)  On the gentoo-dev list I've heard talk of a QA feedback system so that users
can report WORKSFORME on unstable packages.  This will provide the data
necessary to help know when packages should be marked stable.
> 

isn't that what bugs.gentoo.org is for?

> Zac
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Monday 22 August 2005 00:36, Jerry McBride wrote:
> On Sunday 14 August 2005 06:06 pm, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > > What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
> >
> > gcc4
> >
> > since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies got itchy.
> >
> > Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora...
>
> We must not be on the same page.... If you WANT gcc4 you can certainly have
> it in Gentoo.

default gcc gentoo 3.4.x
default gcc fedora:4.0.x


I am fine with that.
You CAN of course force feed your gentoo gcc4, if you want. That is the great 
thing about freedom ;)

But for some people, that is not enough.. that is fine with me. If someone 
wants such a new beast like gcc4 the default, there are many alternatives, 
and the guys who choose gentoo because it is 'always the latest&greatest' may 
rethink their choice, for the better of all of us.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Nick Rout]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 17:13:14 -0500
Joe Menola wrote:

> On Sunday August 14 2005 4:38 pm, Nick Rout wrote:
> > Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
> > and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
> > not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
> 
> Can you name any version of Linux where version upgrades go directly into 
> stable? 
> It's all about choice...the "latest n greatest" or "tried n true". 
> And that's how it is in any flavor of Linux I've tried, LFS  included.

I am not challenging anything of what the "biters" have said in relation
to my post. I know the need for testing and i know that many people
successfully run ~x86 systems for the latest and greatest. 

However, when I first used gentoo I was always the first in my LUG to
have the latest kde, evolution, mplayer etc, and that was running x86
not ~x86. My perception is that gentoo is no longer first off the block
with stable releases. 

I also realise that this is in no small part due to the huge increase in
the number of packages in portage, the growing complexity of package and
dependency management as both the tree and the "bloat" of complex
software grows. 

However I also see constant complaints of people who contribute ebuilds
for new versions or new packages to bugzilla and then have them sit
there for months without any activity at all.

Myself, I love gentoo and this is not a complaint, merely an observation
that things are no longer as they were, and that there appear to be some
factors slowing down the progression of packages in their path from
bugzilla to stable. Maybe this is because the concepts of choice in
gentoo lead to an environment where it is harder to track all possible
combinations of those choices. After all if there were 50 use variables
[1] there are 2^50 combinations of those variables being off or on.
Combine that with variations to architecture, CFLAGS and whatever else
you can configure and you have a much tougher development environment
than one where everything is compiled into "we decide what you get"
binaries. 

[1] i have no idea how many there are.

Cheers.


> 
> -jm
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1569 bytes --]


On Aug 14, 2005, at 4:12 PM, Zac Medico wrote:

> Paul Hoy wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants  
>> that share certain characteristics. I really like Gentoo and I  
>> like that fact that it does a pretty good job at supporting Gnome,  
>> however, it's still behind other releases, such as Fedora, in  
>> terms of when it releases updates, etc. Linux from Scratch looks  
>> very interesting: it appears to rapidly support the latest updates  
>> and it has decent documentation. Does any one have any  
>> perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view?  
>> Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
>> Thanks all,
>> Paul
>>
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what  
> packages specifically?  Do you know how to unmask unstable packages  
> (marked M or M~ at packages.gentoo.org)?
>
> Zac
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

Hi Zac,

I just grabbed a few semi-random examples from the Fedora feed-list  
(http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/). These are stable updates  
between July and August.


xpdf-3.00-20
vim-common-6.3.086-0
openoffice.org-core-1.9.112-1
gcc-4.0.1-4.fc4.i386
all the mysql files
all the php files
xorg-x11-xdm-6.8.2-37
metacity-2.10.0-2

NetworkManager (no Gentoo version)
ethereal-gnome (Can't find a Gentoo equivalent)
kernel-xenU-devel-2.6.12-1.13 (no Gentoo version)

zlib (Gentoo has more recent release than Fedora)
gnome-panel-2.10.1-10.1.i386.rpm (Gentoo has more recent release than  
Fedora)




[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8956 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Nick Rout wrote:
>>Holly Bostick wrote:
>>
>>>What would be different in the Gentoo you envision?
>>>
>>
> I'll bite too. ;-)  On the gentoo-dev list I've heard talk of a QA feedback system so that users
> 
> can report WORKSFORME on unstable packages.  This will provide the data
> necessary to help know when packages should be marked stable.
> 
> 
> isn't that what bugs.gentoo.org is for?
> 

Well, it can be, but what's really needed is a specialized QA feedback system specifically for the purpose of gathering data to determine whether or not specific ebuilds are worthy of being marked stable.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 21, 2005, at 4:05 PM, Jerry McBride wrote:

> On Sunday 14 August 2005 03:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants
>> that share certain characteristics.
>>
>>
>
> Nice way to introduce yourself on a distribution support  
> maillist.... :')
>
I'm sorry that you find the idea of exploring "Linux variants that  
share certain characteristics" so inflammatory and out-of-place on a  
Linux mailing list.
>
>> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good
>> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,
>> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
>>
>>
>
> Huh?
>
A-huh. See http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/
>
>> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
>> support the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any
>> one have any perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-
>> of-view? Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
>>
>>
>
> Yeah, sure... Gentoo is more fun.
>
> As for being "behind other releases"... you gotta-be-kiddin....

See: http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/
See random list provided to another member on this list


>
> What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
>
gcc
openoffice
mysql
php
etc, etc


>
> -- 
>
> ********************************************************************** 
> ********
>                      Registered Linux User Number 185956
>               FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
>              Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
>     Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses  
> $150.00!
>      4:46pm  up 27 days, 16:45,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00,  
> 0.00
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 850 bytes --]


On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
>
>
>> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good
>> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,
>> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
>>
>
> Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is always up to date. If you want to
> run the latest of everything you will need to run a ~arch system.  
> There
> are no releases for Gentoo beyond the installation live CDs. Once
> installed, provided you keep up to date, there is no difference  
> between a
> system installed three years ago and one installed yesterday.
>
>
> -- 
> Neil Bothwick
>
> Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.
>

Hi Neil,

~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.

Paul



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3259 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Nick Rout wrote:

>
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
> Zac Medico wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what  
>> packages specifically?  Do
>>
> you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
> packages.gentoo.org)?
>
> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
>
>
>
>>
>> Zac
>>
>
> -- 
> Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>
>
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

Hi Nick,

Yup, I've unmasked a few packages .. openoffice_ximian, for instance.

Paul
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

See inline


On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:

> Nick Rout schreef:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
>> Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>
>>> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what  
>>> packages specifically?  Do
>>>
>>
>> you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
>> packages.gentoo.org)?
>>
>> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast  
>> through
>> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it  
>> does
>> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
>>
>>
> OK, I'll bite. What then do you consider "a release of a recent  
> version"
> to be constituted from?
>

I don't really understand your question. The most recent version to  
me coincides to a release date closest to whatever today is.

> If it's been released upstream, and it's in Portage a couple of hours
> later, so I can install it, I don't know what more you could want....
> what, you want a Mandrake- (or worse, still, Debian) -style wait of
> months before you can use the upstream version?
>

I don't agree with you. There are many examples where a file that has  
been released upstream has not found its way into Portage. I've  
provided examples elsewhere in this thread. You can also compare with  
the Fedora feedlist.


> I'll grant you that it's sometimes a little bumpy... but then you  
> might
> as well be running Slack or something (not that there's anything wrong
> with Slackware except the appalling package management).
>

I agree. I don't like like Slackware's package management either.


> But since I have yet to find a problem I couldn't solve in a few
> minutes-- and if I couldn't, it was clearly a dev issue/b.g.o issue,
> where I could generally count on it to be solved within hours, if not
> prior to my discovery-- I really can't quite see what you're on about.
>

Perhaps you've pointed out the difference in perspectives and  
experience. I've run into a few problems where it has taken me longer  
than a merely few mintues to resolve a problem.

I'm actually not "on about" anything. I'm interested in the  
differrences/similarities between LFC and Gentoo, which I stated in  
my original email.

> What would be different in the Gentoo you envision?
>

Well, that's actually the question I'm asking.

> Holly
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:06 PM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:
>
>
>> What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
>>
>
> gcc4
>
> since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies got  
> itchy.
>
> Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora...
> -- 
>

> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

--> "Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora..."

As an aside, some in the Gentoo community have been accused of  
arrogance. I don't know whether this is true though.


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Holly Bostick]

Paul Hoy schreef:
> 
> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good  
>>> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,  
>>> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
>>>
>>
>> Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is always up to date. If you want to
>> run the latest of everything you will need to run a ~arch system. There
>> are no releases for Gentoo beyond the installation live CDs. Once
>> installed, provided you keep up to date, there is no difference between a
>> system installed three years ago and one installed yesterday.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Neil Bothwick
>>
>> Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.
>>
> 
> Hi Neil,
> 
> ~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.  
> 
> Paul

Well, that's understandable, if that's the way you are, but "you"
(generic) can't have it both ways.

If you want the latest upstream release of whatever, it's not
necessarily going to be stable... all newly-released software is subject
to bugs that only come out with use of the kind that only freaky ol'
users can conceive.

No distribution marks anything stable until it's old enough to have been
worked to death to get the bugs out. Which is fine.

Nobody's making anybody use ~, and if you (generic) value stability,
you're already used to waiting. It's true that there is a backlog of
submitted ebuilds on b.g.o... some of them are perfectly stable (but
just aren't in actual Portage yet), some need some help before they'll
work properly (because the ebuild writer made some mistakes along the
way). I've been following the taskjuggler b.g.o ebuild for a couple of
months, and that just made it into Portage yesterday. But I've had
taskjuggler for a couple of months (had to hack the ebuild to get it to
compile). I'm looking forward to upgrading to the new ebuild to see if
all of the kinks have been ironed out.

Almost all Linux software is a constantly-evolving WIP, and conforming a
WIP to a distribution which itself is a WIP is a big job. The only way
it can "succeed" in terms of being considered temporarily stable is to
freeze things at some point.

RedHat (Fedora) and other binary distros do this themselves (you won't
get thus-and-so version of X application until they've worked out the
kinks between the app and the distro). Gentoo relies on you to do this
for yourself. Mask all of unstable if that's how you want it (and wait
for it to propagate down). Or unmask specific programs that you're
willing to deal with some possible instability in order to 'keep up with
the Joneses'. Or just live wild and run completely unstable (which
usually works, but can go horribly, horribly wrong on occasion-- I still
haven't gotten over the PAM debacle that ate my previous Gentoo install).

It's up to you. It always is, with Gentoo... which is why I love it.

But I don't so much see what there is to debate about-- your system is
*yours*; run it the way you want.

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Paul Hoy wrote:
> 
> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good  
>>> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,  
>>> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
>>>
>>
>> Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is always up to date. If you want to
>> run the latest of everything you will need to run a ~arch system. There
>> are no releases for Gentoo beyond the installation live CDs. Once
>> installed, provided you keep up to date, there is no difference between a
>> system installed three years ago and one installed yesterday.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Neil Bothwick
>>
>> Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.
>>
> 
> Hi Neil,
> 
> ~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.  
> 

We, you do know that you can pick which ~arch packages you want, right?  In most cases it's pretty safe to use a "keyword masked" package, especially if the masked package is not depended on by your core gentoo system.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 954 bytes --]


On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
>
>
>> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast  
>> through
>> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it  
>> does
>> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
>>
>
> They're not "unstable", they are "testing", and that only applies  
> to the
> ebuild itself, not the upstream package. If you want the latest  
> versions,
> you need to run ~arch. Any distro that puts brand new packages  
> (with the
> exception of security fixes) into its stable package tree has  
> thrown all
> concept of QA out of the window.
>
>
> -- 
> Neil Bothwick
>
> Top Oxymorons Number 30: Business ethics
>

Hi Neil,

Is there a way to explicitly search for ~arch releases or do I have  
set the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable in make.conf and hope for the best  
during emerge?

Paul


ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3367 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 7:26 PM, Joe Menola wrote:

> On Sunday August 14 2005 5:43 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
>
>> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:05 PM, Joe Menola wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday August 14 2005 2:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
>>>> support
>>>> the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one
>>>> have any
>>>> perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view?  
>>>> Does
>>>> anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've built both Gentoo and LFS. A side by side comparison comes up
>>> pretty much
>>> equal. Except for documentation, where Gentoo wins hands down. IMO
>>>
>>> google>"gentoo"=3,990,000 hits
>>> google>"lfs"=877,000 hits
>>>
>>> -jm
>>>
>
>
>>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> What about the LFS community - did you find it helpful?
>>
>> Of course, the answer is probably objective. Developer types may not
>> have to rely so much on community whereas those who have the great
>> capacity to take forever to understand the point, like myself,
>> require a good community.
>>
>> Also, I agree with you that the Gentoo documentation (most of it) is
>> excellent; I've printed, and have read most of it.
>>
>> One more question, and it's the most obvious. You said that Gentoo
>> and LFS are more or less equal. So, that begs the question: what
>> persuaded you to stick with Gentoo?
>>
>> Thanks ,
>> Paul
>>
>
> The LFs community was very helpful, I couldn't have built a working  
> system
> without them. :)
> I just find it easier when Goggle finds other documented problems  
> that match
> mine. The size of the Gentoo user base makes this much more likely  
> with
> Gentoo vs LFS.
> To answer the obvious...Gentoo is easier to build then LFS. LFS's  
> style of
> package by package installing is great for learning the workings of  
> Linux,
> and I wouldn't trade-in my experience with LFS for anything.

Yes, that's what attracted me to Gentoo and to LFS/BLFS also: I'm  
interested in learning the inner workings of Linux. I've hacked  
around with Linux since the very early days of Redhat, but I still  
don't have a comprehensive understanding of the OS. This is despite  
that fact that I usually used tarballs rather than RPMs, even in  
Redhat and Fedora.

> But starting from scratch with LFS and obtaining a working Kde  
> desktop took me (from
> memory) a few weeks to build. With Gentoo, I was there in a few  
> days thanks
> to "emerge kde-meta".
>

Yeah, there were even some pre-compiled Linux distros in which it  
took a long time to get a Gnome desktop (vlos and foresight linux,  
for instance). Like you, it took me a few days to get a working Gnome  
desktop with Gentoo.

> -jm
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


Thanks, Joe. This is the kind of conversation I was looking for.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 9:01 PM, Zac Medico wrote:

> Paul Hoy wrote:
>
>> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty  
>>>> good  job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other  
>>>> releases,  such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates,  
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is always up to date. If you  
>>> want to
>>> run the latest of everything you will need to run a ~arch system.  
>>> There
>>> are no releases for Gentoo beyond the installation live CDs. Once
>>> installed, provided you keep up to date, there is no difference  
>>> between a
>>> system installed three years ago and one installed yesterday.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Neil Bothwick
>>>
>>> Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.
>>>
>>>
>> Hi Neil,
>> ~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.
>>
>
> We, you do know that you can pick which ~arch packages you want,  
> right?  In most cases it's pretty safe to use a "keyword masked"  
> package, especially if the masked package is not depended on by  
> your core gentoo system.
>
> Zac
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


Hi Zac,

Yes, I know how to unmask. But, when you say "pick which ~arch  
packages...," does this mean I can search for ~arch packages too or  
do I have to set the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable?

Paul



-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Holly Bostick]

Paul Hoy schreef:
> See inline
> 
> 
> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:
> 
>> Nick Rout schreef:
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
>>> Zac Medico wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>
>>>> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what 
>>>> packages specifically?  Do
>>>>
>>>
>>> you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
>>> packages.gentoo.org)?
>>>
>>> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast  through
>>> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it  does
>>> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
>>>
>>>
>> OK, I'll bite. What then do you consider "a release of a recent  version"
>> to be constituted from?
>>
> 
> I don't really understand your question. The most recent version to  me
> coincides to a release date closest to whatever today is.

OK, so what you're saying is that an application's entry into Portage
unstable does not constitute a 'release' of the package in Gentoo terms,
as far as you're concerned? So until Firefox 1.0.6 and KDE 3.4.2
propagate down to stable (which could take time, admittedly), it's not
actually released? Well, to each his or her own, I guess.

> 
>> If it's been released upstream, and it's in Portage a couple of hours
>> later, so I can install it, I don't know what more you could want....
>> what, you want a Mandrake- (or worse, still, Debian) -style wait of
>> months before you can use the upstream version?
>>
> 
> I don't agree with you. There are many examples where a file that has 
> been released upstream has not found its way into Portage. I've 
> provided examples elsewhere in this thread. You can also compare with 
> the Fedora feedlist.

Yes, I know. I'm creating a list of interesting programs I've discovered
that aren't in Portage or b.g.o, to practice my ebuild writing skills.

But you know, I don't give the first hairy hoot about the Fedora
feedlist. This idea that 'marking' a package 'stable' is some kind of
magic bullet that actually *makes* the package stable is starting to get
on my nerves a bit. What Gentoo marks or doesn't mark the package, or in
fact whether or not it's in Portage, generally has nothing to do with
the status of the package itself. There are plenty of perfectly stable
packages in Gentoo unstable, plenty of stable ebuilds (meaning that they
compile the application correctly, and beyond that point it depends on
the upstream stability) in b.g.o, and even a few on breakmygentoo.org.
And plenty of 'stable' packages that just act wonky in various ways as
upstream manages the changes in whatever they're doing (migrating to the
freedesktop standard, implementing DirectX 9 support, working around
video driver bugs, kernel bugs, scheduler changes, you name it).

I use what I need, and I get what I need from wherever it may happen to
be. Most of it comes from Portage, of course, but I've got some ebuilds
in my overlay from b.g.o, a couple from Project Utopia, and some perl
modules from cpan. It all works pretty well, and when it doesn't, I
either ditch the package until it works a bit better, or fix it myself
(and report what I had to do up the chain, if appropriate). It all looks
a bit patchwork I suppose, but it's my patchwork, and so I know what
sticky-out-bit goes where... most of the time. And I decide if there's
going to be sticky-out-bits at all...there's no way, with an ATI card,
that I'm going anywhere near the new modular X for quite a while, for
example. But not because of Gentoo... because there's way too many
upstream cooks for me to think they're going to concoct a 'stable' brew,
*for me*, anytime soon. I said before and I do believe that the Gentoo
dev team will do their very best (and that's damn good) to provide
stable ebuilds that work as well as possible, but there's way too much
whitewater flowing down the channel for me to believe that even they can
successfully guide me through these difficult transitions.

It just seems to me that if you want or expect a team of well-paid
experts monitoring all possible inconveniences and smoothing them over
before you even see them... well, then Fedora would be the place to be.
Or SuSE. Gentoo or Ubuntu, on the other hand....

Holly
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 8:58 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:

> Paul Hoy schreef:
>
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:24 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 15:42:19 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty  
>>>> good
>>>> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,
>>>> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gentoo has rolling updates, so it is always up to date. If you  
>>> want to
>>> run the latest of everything you will need to run a ~arch system.  
>>> There
>>> are no releases for Gentoo beyond the installation live CDs. Once
>>> installed, provided you keep up to date, there is no difference  
>>> between a
>>> system installed three years ago and one installed yesterday.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Neil Bothwick
>>>
>>> Windows Error #09: Game Over. Exiting Windows.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Hi Neil,
>>
>> ~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
> Well, that's understandable, if that's the way you are, but "you"
> (generic) can't have it both ways.

> If you want the latest upstream release of whatever, it's not
> necessarily going to be stable... all newly-released software is  
> subject
> to bugs that only come out with use of the kind that only freaky ol'
> users can conceive.
>

No, I want it one way: to receive the latest stable releases. I  
didn't say anything about unstable or testing releases.

> No distribution marks anything stable until it's old enough to have  
> been
> worked to death to get the bugs out. Which is fine.
>
> Nobody's making anybody use ~, and if you (generic) value stability,
> you're already used to waiting. It's true that there is a backlog of
> submitted ebuilds on b.g.o... some of them are perfectly stable (but
> just aren't in actual Portage yet), some need some help before they'll
> work properly (because the ebuild writer made some mistakes along the
> way). I've been following the taskjuggler b.g.o ebuild for a couple of
> months, and that just made it into Portage yesterday. But I've had
> taskjuggler for a couple of months (had to hack the ebuild to get  
> it to
> compile). I'm looking forward to upgrading to the new ebuild to see if
> all of the kinks have been ironed out.

This is good to hear. I plan to investigate this ebuilds further.

>
> Almost all Linux software is a constantly-evolving WIP, and  
> conforming a
> WIP to a distribution which itself is a WIP is a big job. The only way
> it can "succeed" in terms of being considered temporarily stable is to
> freeze things at some point.
>
> RedHat (Fedora) and other binary distros do this themselves (you won't
> get thus-and-so version of X application until they've worked out the
> kinks between the app and the distro).

This is not the case with Fedora. Fedora is generally seen (and  
experienced) as a test-bed, if you like, for Red Hat.

> Gentoo relies on you to do this
> for yourself. Mask all of unstable if that's how you want it (and wait
> for it to propagate down). Or unmask specific programs that you're
> willing to deal with some possible instability in order to 'keep up  
> with
> the Joneses'. Or just live wild and run completely unstable (which
> usually works, but can go horribly, horribly wrong on occasion-- I  
> still
> haven't gotten over the PAM debacle that ate my previous Gentoo  
> install).
>
> It's up to you. It always is, with Gentoo... which is why I love it.
>
> But I don't so much see what there is to debate about-- your system is
> *yours*; run it the way you want.
>
Again, if you see the original email.  This wasn't about a debate. It  
was about getting perspectives from people who used both LFS and Gentoo.

Thanks, Holly.

> Holly
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Paul Hoy wrote:
> 
> On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
>>> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
>>> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
>>>
>>
>> They're not "unstable", they are "testing", and that only applies to the
>> ebuild itself, not the upstream package. If you want the latest versions,
>> you need to run ~arch. Any distro that puts brand new packages (with the
>> exception of security fixes) into its stable package tree has thrown all
>> concept of QA out of the window.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Neil Bothwick
>>
>> Top Oxymorons Number 30: Business ethics
>>
> 
> Hi Neil,
> 
> Is there a way to explicitly search for ~arch releases or do I have set 
> the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable in make.conf and hope for the best during 
> emerge?
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> *ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable*
> 
> 

You can export variables in the shell (not generally recommended) or put them directly on the command line.

ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -s foo

It's best to use /etc/portage/package.keywords to keep your package specific keywords (documented in the "portage" manpage).

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Aug 14, 2005, at 9:34 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:

> Paul Hoy schreef:
>
>> See inline
>>
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2005, at 5:51 PM, Holly Bostick wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Nick Rout schreef:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 13:12:31 -0700
>>>> Zac Medico wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what
>>>>> packages specifically?  Do
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> you know how to unmask unstable packages (marked M or M~ at
>>>> packages.gentoo.org)?
>>>>
>>>> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast   
>>>> through
>>>> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside  
>>>> it  does
>>>> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> OK, I'll bite. What then do you consider "a release of a recent   
>>> version"
>>> to be constituted from?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I don't really understand your question. The most recent version  
>> to  me
>> coincides to a release date closest to whatever today is.
>>
>
> OK, so what you're saying is that an application's entry into Portage
> unstable does not constitute a 'release' of the package in Gentoo  
> terms,
> as far as you're concerned? So until Firefox 1.0.6 and KDE 3.4.2
> propagate down to stable (which could take time, admittedly), it's not
> actually released? Well, to each his or her own, I guess.
>
>
>>
>>
>>> If it's been released upstream, and it's in Portage a couple of  
>>> hours
>>> later, so I can install it, I don't know what more you could  
>>> want....
>>> what, you want a Mandrake- (or worse, still, Debian) -style wait of
>>> months before you can use the upstream version?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I don't agree with you. There are many examples where a file that has
>> been released upstream has not found its way into Portage. I've
>> provided examples elsewhere in this thread. You can also compare with
>> the Fedora feedlist.
>>
>
> Yes, I know. I'm creating a list of interesting programs I've  
> discovered
> that aren't in Portage or b.g.o, to practice my ebuild writing skills.
>
> But you know, I don't give the first hairy hoot about the Fedora
> feedlist. This idea that 'marking' a package 'stable' is some kind of
> magic bullet that actually *makes* the package stable is starting  
> to get
> on my nerves a bit.

It appears I may be contradicting myself, but I agree with you here.  
Fedora releases something as stable, but in some cases, it's far from  
it.  NetworkManager is my favourite example.


> What Gentoo marks or doesn't mark the package, or in
> fact whether or not it's in Portage, generally has nothing to do with
> the status of the package itself. There are plenty of perfectly stable
> packages in Gentoo unstable, plenty of stable ebuilds (meaning that  
> they
> compile the application correctly, and beyond that point it depends on
> the upstream stability) in b.g.o, and even a few on breakmygentoo.org.
> And plenty of 'stable' packages that just act wonky in various ways as
> upstream manages the changes in whatever they're doing (migrating  
> to the
> freedesktop standard, implementing DirectX 9 support, working around
> video driver bugs, kernel bugs, scheduler changes, you name it).
>
> I use what I need, and I get what I need from wherever it may  
> happen to
> be. Most of it comes from Portage, of course, but I've got some  
> ebuilds
> in my overlay from b.g.o, a couple from Project Utopia, and some perl

Yes, I've scanned over the instructions for creating your own ebuilds  
and I've experimented with the Gnome 2.12 beta ebuild put out by  
someone.

> modules from cpan. It all works pretty well, and when it doesn't, I
> either ditch the package until it works a bit better, or fix it myself
> (and report what I had to do up the chain, if appropriate). It all  
> looks
> a bit patchwork I suppose, but it's my patchwork, and so I know what
> sticky-out-bit goes where... most of the time. And I decide if there's
> going to be sticky-out-bits at all...there's no way, with an ATI card,
> that I'm going anywhere near the new modular X for quite a while, for

Yes, that is one of my great joys - having an ATI card on my Notebook.

> example. But not because of Gentoo... because there's way too many
> upstream cooks for me to think they're going to concoct a 'stable'  
> brew,
> *for me*, anytime soon. I said before and I do believe that the Gentoo
> dev team will do their very best (and that's damn good) to provide
> stable ebuilds that work as well as possible, but there's way too much
> whitewater flowing down the channel for me to believe that even  
> they can
> successfully guide me through these difficult transitions.
>
> It just seems to me that if you want or expect a team of well-paid
> experts monitoring all possible inconveniences and smoothing them over
> before you even see them... well, then Fedora would be the place to  
> be.
> Or SuSE. Gentoo or Ubuntu, on the other hand....
>

Again, I don't think Fedora removes all the defects at all. SuSE  
doesn't either, at least for the Gnome desktop. And, believe it not,  
neither does Ubuntu, notably with packaging.

> Holly
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Joe Menola]

On Sunday August 14 2005 8:48 pm, Zac Medico wrote:
> You can export variables in the shell (not generally recommended) or put
> them directly on the command line.
>
> ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -s foo
>
> It's best to use /etc/portage/package.keywords to keep your package
> specific keywords (documented in the "portage" manpage).

>From the wiki, a handy little scripts for doing this...

http://gentoo-wiki.com/Masked#Script_for_.2Fetc.2Fportage.2Fpackage.keywords

-jm

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 18:48 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Paul Hoy wrote:
> > 
> > On Aug 14, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 09:38:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Unstable does not really cut it IMHO. I am a gentoo enthusiast through
> >>> and through, but plonking something in portage with a ~ beside it does
> >>> not constitute a release of a recent version IMHO.
> >>>
> >>
> >> They're not "unstable", they are "testing", and that only applies to the
> >> ebuild itself, not the upstream package. If you want the latest versions,
> >> you need to run ~arch. Any distro that puts brand new packages (with the
> >> exception of security fixes) into its stable package tree has thrown all
> >> concept of QA out of the window.
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Neil Bothwick
> >>
> >> Top Oxymorons Number 30: Business ethics
> >>
> > 
> > Hi Neil,
> > 
> > Is there a way to explicitly search for ~arch releases or do I have set 
> > the ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable in make.conf and hope for the best during 
> > emerge?
> > 
> > Paul
> > 
> > 
> > *ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable*
> > 
> > 
> 
> You can export variables in the shell (not generally recommended) or put them directly on the command line.
> 
> ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -s foo
> 
> It's best to use /etc/portage/package.keywords to keep your package specific keywords (documented in the "portage" manpage).
> 
> Zac

Zac,

Beauty. Just tried it and found some gnome updates. Very much
appreciated.

Paul

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Sun, 2005-08-14 at 20:55 -0500, Joe Menola wrote:
> On Sunday August 14 2005 8:48 pm, Zac Medico wrote:
> > You can export variables in the shell (not generally recommended) or put
> > them directly on the command line.
> >
> > ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -s foo
> >
> > It's best to use /etc/portage/package.keywords to keep your package
> > specific keywords (documented in the "portage" manpage).
> 
> From the wiki, a handy little scripts for doing this...
> 
> http://gentoo-wiki.com/Masked#Script_for_.2Fetc.2Fportage.2Fpackage.keywords
> 
> -jm
> 

Joe,

Very cool. Took a look at it, and I'll try it out. Thanks again.

Paul

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Barry.SCHWARTZ]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 848 bytes --]

Jerry McBride <mcbrides9@comcast.net> skribis:
> On Sunday 14 August 2005 06:06 pm, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > > What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
> >
> > gcc4
> >
> > since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies got itchy.
> >
> > Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora...
> 
> We must not be on the same page.... If you WANT gcc4 you can certainly have it 
> in Gentoo.

Another thing, too, and I don't know if this is the case with Fedora,
but a binary distribution isn't necessarily all compiled with the
installed compiler.  It probably ought to be, but it doesn't have to
be.

A few adventurous individuals (not I) have been using gcc4 to build
~amd64 stuff and there are still some packages that give trouble.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Walter Dnes]

On Sun, Aug 14, 2005 at 03:42:19PM -0400, Paul Hoy wrote

> This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants  
> that share certain characteristics.
> 
> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good  
> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,  
> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
> 
> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly  
> support the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any  
> one have any perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point- 
> of-view? Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?

  Look at it this way, if you're competent to build Linux-From-Scratch,
you should have no problems whatsoever building from tarballs the few
packages you can't find in Gentoo, and putting them in /usr/local or
/opt.  Heck, I was doing the...
./configure --with-various-options && make && make install
schtick back in my Redhat days.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
My musings on technology and security at http://tech_sec.blog.ca
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 01:19 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> alls the few
> packages you can't find in Gentoo, and putting them in /usr/local or
> /opt.  Heck, I was doing the...

Hi Walter,

Exactly what I've started to do. Problem is, I'm only beginning to learn
how to let Portage know that my manual install is there. Secondly,
installing, say, Gnome 2.12 would be considered a major install with 9
trillion dependencies.

Paul

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 363 bytes --]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:37:47 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:

> ~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.

That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before being
marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
 Without it, your stable branch would not be.

-- 
Neil Bothwick

Top Oxymorons Number 12: Plastic glasses

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1454 bytes --]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:40:49 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:

> However, when I first used gentoo I was always the first in my LUG to
> have the latest kde, evolution, mplayer etc, and that was running x86
> not ~x86. My perception is that gentoo is no longer first off the block
> with stable releases. 

I think some of this confusion is caused by the way people switch between
two uses of the word stable. It can mean "doesn't crash", but then most
upstream latest packages fit there, and some long standing releases
don't. It can also mean "not changing" and this is what some people want
from a distribution. If you run a server farm, you don't want to be
continually upgrading just to get new features you don't need, you just
want a system that works with timely security fixes. This is why Debian
stable is so old, because for these people, old is good. Look at the
situation with Firefox recently, where a new testing ebuild seemed to
come out almost as soon as the previous one finished building. Great for
those who want the latest and greatest, not so good for those who want a
stable system. Gentoo gives you the choice, and even lets you pick and
mix, so don't complain because you make an unsuitable choice.

If you want the latest now, you need to use the testing packages, because
the QA rules demand they remain in testing for a while.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Windows Multitasking - screwing up several things at once

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 439 bytes --]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 19:49:53 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:

> > What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?

> openoffice

[root@hactar ~]# genlop openoffice-bin
 * app-office/openoffice-bin
     Wed Jul 20 15:29:36 2005 >>> app-office/openoffice-bin-1.9.118
     Fri Aug  5 15:07:02 2005 >>> app-office/openoffice-bin-1.9.122

When was 1.9.122 released?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

What's another word for `Thesaurus'?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1147 bytes --]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 21:39:39 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:

> No, I want it one way: to receive the latest stable releases. I  
> didn't say anything about unstable or testing releases.

testing/stable refers to the ebuild, not the upstream package. If you
want the latest, install the ~arch ebuild and report any problems you
find. That's how a community distribution works, you can't just expect to
be given the latest package on the day of release without some effort on
your part. The stable tree is for those who want tried and tested
software and ebuild, version chasers should use testing.

I run testing on three architectures with far less problems than I had
with Mandrake Cooker (and I didn't have too many of those) so don't think
that testing means unstable, unreliable or dodgy in some way. All it
really means is unproven, and the only way for it to move from there to
stable is for people to use it.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Iraqi terrorist, Khay Rahnajet, didn't pay enough postage on a
letter bomb. It came back with "return to sender" stamped on it.
Forgetting it was the bomb, he opened it and was blown to bits.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Monday 15 August 2005 10:18, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:37:47 -0400, Paul Hoy wrote:
> > ~arch is a little scary for me, since it's not in the stable branch.
>
> That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before being
> marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
>  Without it, your stable branch would not be.

I am a long time ~arch-only user and have/had less problems, than friends 
using the stable tree. Plus if there is a problem, my friends with stable 
will hit it too some days/week later - and I am there 'support', so it is 
good for me, if I already found a solution.

It is not all about versions.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Nick Rout]

On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:28 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> I think some of this confusion is caused by the way people switch
> between
> two uses of the word stable. It can mean "doesn't crash", but then
> most
> upstream latest packages fit there, and some long standing releases
> don't. It can also mean "not changing" and this is what some people
> want
> from a distribution. 

I think there is a third meaning with gentoo, namely when the ebuild is
working well enough - this is independent of whether the upstream
package is stable.(although it no doubt helps if it is). So you can have
kde make a release (stable in their view) but gentoo takes some
considerable time to make ebuilds that work acceptably, before they are
marked stable (eg x86 cf ~x86)


> If you run a server farm, you don't want to be
> continually upgrading just to get new features you don't need, you
> just
> want a system that works with timely security fixes.



-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 914 bytes --]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:06:59 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> > That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before
> > being marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
> >  Without it, your stable branch would not be.
> 
> I am a long time ~arch-only user and have/had less problems, than friends

Spoken like a true geek :)

>  using the stable tree. Plus if there is a problem, my friends
> with stable will hit it too some days/week later - and I am there
> 'support', so it is good for me, if I already found a solution.

Oh, there's more :) I too have found ~arch to be extremely reliable. The
main downside is the extra time spent on updates, which could be a killer
in a production environment.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Head: (n.) the part of a disk drive which detects sectors and decides
which of the two possible values to return: 'lose a turn' or 'bankrupt.'

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Monday 15 August 2005 11:54, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:06:59 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > > That's the whole point. ebuilds need to be thoroughly tested before
> > > being marked stable, so you need a testing branch.
> > >  Without it, your stable branch would not be.
> >
> > I am a long time ~arch-only user and have/had less problems, than friends
>
> Spoken like a true geek :)
>
> >  using the stable tree. Plus if there is a problem, my friends
> > with stable will hit it too some days/week later - and I am there
> > 'support', so it is good for me, if I already found a solution.
>
> Oh, there's more :) I too have found ~arch to be extremely reliable. The
> main downside is the extra time spent on updates, which could be a killer
> in a production environment.

oh yeah... and don't wait too long with the updates.. less than once every few 
days and the problems will pile up... from my humble experience, it is much 
less troublesome, to do daily updates, than weekly ones ;)
So ~arch is only for people who don't mind having some compiling in the 
background running.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1807 bytes --]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:50:00 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:

> > I think some of this confusion is caused by the way people switch
> > between
> > two uses of the word stable. It can mean "doesn't crash", but then
> > most
> > upstream latest packages fit there, and some long standing releases
> > don't. It can also mean "not changing" and this is what some people
> > want
> > from a distribution. 
> 
> I think there is a third meaning with gentoo, namely when the ebuild is
> working well enough

This is not another meaning but a different context. People keep assuming
that the arch and ~arch alternatives refer to the package, when they only
refer to the ebuild.

> - this is independent of whether the upstream
> package is stable.(although it no doubt helps if it is). So you can have
> kde make a release (stable in their view) but gentoo takes some
> considerable time to make ebuilds that work acceptably, before they are
> marked stable (eg x86 cf ~x86)

It's not the time it takes to make them work acceptably, most of the KDE
3.4 ebuilds worked fine in the initial release. It is the time it takes
to prove that they are suitable for marking stable. The stable ebuild is
usually the same one that the ~arch users installed a month ago with no
problems.

Choosing between arch and ~arch is choosing whether you want someone else
to test things for you or whether you are prepared to do some of the work
yourself.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Das Internet is nicht fuer gefingerclicken und giffengrabben. Ist easy
droppenpacket der routers und overloaden der backbone mit der spammen
und der me-tooen. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das
mausklicken sichtseeren keepen das bandwit-spewin hans in das pockets
muss; relaxen und watchen das cursorblinken.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 453 bytes --]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:02:46 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> oh yeah... and don't wait too long with the updates.. less than once
> every few days and the problems will pile up... from my humble
> experience, it is much less troublesome, to do daily updates, than
> weekly ones ;)

Start every day with a nice strong brew and emerge world -uavDN :)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I couldn't possibly be wrong. I use an error correcting modem!

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 12:02:46 +0200, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> 
> 
>>oh yeah... and don't wait too long with the updates.. less than once
>>every few days and the problems will pile up... from my humble
>>experience, it is much less troublesome, to do daily updates, than
>>weekly ones ;)
> 
> 
> Start every day with a nice strong brew and emerge world -uavDN :)
> 
> 

I used to do it every day like that.  Lately I've reduced the frequency to 3 or 4 days which seems to work pretty well.  Actually, since I've reduced the frequency, it seems like I've encountered far fewer broken builds.

It's a probability game.  More syncs and updates means more ebuilds built and more chances for things to go wrong.  Plus, you end up building every little revision that comes out, which is wasteful.

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[fire-eyes]

On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 11:28 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
> can report WORKSFORME on unstable packages.  This will provide the
> data
> necessary to help know when packages should be marked stable.
> > 
> 
> isn't that what bugs.gentoo.org is for?

I thought so at one point but got sort of flamed for it when trying it.
I wouldn't recommend it. I tried to find that bug, but couldn't.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Graham Murray]

Zac Medico <zmedico@gmail.com> writes:

> Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what
> packages specifically?  Do you know how to unmask unstable packages
> (marked M or M~ at packages.gentoo.org)?

ipsec-tools. The current upstream 'release' is 0.6, and 0.6.1 is at
release candidate. The latest in portage is 0.5.2.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Zac Medico]

Graham Murray wrote:
> Zac Medico <zmedico@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> 
>>Are we really far behind?  That's difficult to believe.  For what
>>packages specifically?  Do you know how to unmask unstable packages
>>(marked M or M~ at packages.gentoo.org)?
> 
> 
> ipsec-tools. The current upstream 'release' is 0.6, and 0.6.1 is at
> release candidate. The latest in portage is 0.5.2.

That's unfortunate.  I guess none of the gentoo devs happen to be particularly interested in a version bump on that package.  Oh well, most of them probably don't get paid for the work they do on gentoo, so who can blame them?  Having more developers would help, but there will always be packages suffering from lack of developer interest.

Usually with version bumps, you can just copy the existing ebuild into your overlay and rename it (see portage docs for PORDIR_OVERLAY).  There is a version bump ebuild for ipsec-tools attached to bug 100692:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100692

Zac
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 09:28 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 11:40:49 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
> 
> > However, when I first used gentoo I was always the first in my LUG to
> > have the latest kde, evolution, mplayer etc, and that was running x86
> > not ~x86. My perception is that gentoo is no longer first off the block
> > with stable releases. 
> 
> I think some of this confusion is caused by the way people switch between
> two uses of the word stable. It can mean "doesn't crash", but then most
> upstream latest packages fit there, and some long standing releases
> don't. It can also mean "not changing" and this is what some people want
> from a distribution. If you run a server farm, you don't want to be
> continually upgrading just to get new features you don't need, you just
> want a system that works with timely security fixes. This is why Debian
> stable is so old, because for these people, old is good. Look at the
> situation with Firefox recently, where a new testing ebuild seemed to
> come out almost as soon as the previous one finished building. Great for
> those who want the latest and greatest, not so good for those who want a
> stable system. Gentoo gives you the choice, and even lets you pick and
> mix, so don't complain because you make an unsuitable choice.
> 
> If you want the latest now, you need to use the testing packages, because
> the QA rules demand they remain in testing for a while.
> 
> 
Thanks, Neil. Already have begun testing my luck with the testing
packages. I'll see what happens. Thanks for your explanation of the
testking packages.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Peter Karlsson]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Paul Hoy wrote:

> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good job at 
> supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases, such as Fedora, 
> in terms of when it releases updates, etc.

I find that hard to believe...

> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly support the 
> latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one have any 
> perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does anyone 
> wish to share a comparison of the two?

The short version:

LFS is for those who wishes to learn how to build an operating system from 
scratch. Or for control-freaks (like me). Or a combination of both... :-)

Gentoo is a more practical version of LFS, where "practical" means less 
time-consuming, since you don't have to install each package (and it's 
dependencies) yourself and there are default settings/scripts that 
usually works ok with no/minor tweaking. Though you can install a package 
manager in LFS too (like rpm, apt, ports etc.).

HTH

Best regards

Peter K
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Mon, 2005-08-15 at 22:00 +0200, Peter Karlsson wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005, Paul Hoy wrote:
> 
> > I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good job at 
> > supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases, such as Fedora, 
> > in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
> 
> I find that hard to believe...
> 

I know, I would find it hard to believe too. But, just a simple
comparision with the Fedora feedlist will show you that this is
generally true. Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 & 4 email
updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
the updates, some of them quite significantly. Most of them are
KDE-related files, so normally I would have never noticed this. I'll
keep the list for awhile in case anyone is interested in reviewing it.
Of course, you can also view the Fedora feedlist website. I should also
add that I noted about eight random and recent examples. Finally, other
users who joined the thread have also provided examples. 


> > Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly support the 
> > latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any one have any 
> > perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-of-view? Does anyone 
> > wish to share a comparison of the two?
> 
> The short version:
> 
> LFS is for those who wishes to learn how to build an operating system from 
> scratch. Or for control-freaks (like me). Or a combination of both... :-)
> 
> Gentoo is a more practical version of LFS, where "practical" means less 
> time-consuming, since you don't have to install each package (and it's 
> dependencies) yourself and there are default settings/scripts that 
> usually works ok with no/minor tweaking. Though you can install a package 
> manager in LFS too (like rpm, apt, ports etc.).
> 

I think I'm a combination of the two also. 


Thanks.


> HTH
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Peter K

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Nick Rout]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:58:54 -0400
Paul Hoy wrote:

> Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 & 4 email
> updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
> the updates, some of them quite significantly. Most of them are
> KDE-related files,


That confirms my thoughts (which i posted yesterday).

So can you clarify, is that 23/24 packages are behind on x86 or on ~x86?

i.e. would an ~x86 gentoo be ahead or behind fedora?


-- 
Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Paul Hoy]

On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 13:11 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:58:54 -0400
> Paul Hoy wrote:
> 
> > Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 & 4 email
> > updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
> > the updates, some of them quite significantly. Most of them are
> > KDE-related files,
> 
> 
> That confirms my thoughts (which i posted yesterday).
> 
> So can you clarify, is that 23/24 packages are behind on x86 or on ~x86?
> 
> i.e. would an ~x86 gentoo be ahead or behind fedora?
> 
> 

My original email was 23/24 packages for x86. However, after reading
your email, I compared the first 10 kde updates with ~x86 releases. It
came out that Fedora was ahead 50 percent of the time or both distros
shared the same release versions. In case I'm doing something
incorrectly, you can also view the updates at
http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/

Of course, this new comparison is between testing releases and so-called
stable Fedora releases. There is a Fedora extras/unstable list (Fedora
Core 4 Testing Updates) for that, but I don't receive that one. It also
should be noted that the updates I listed happen to be mostly for Fedora
3, not Fedora 4. I compared some Fedora 4 releases the other day and
shared them with this list and Fedora was ahead 90 percent of the time
(out of about 10 recent release comparisons).

Finally, after doing a ~x86 compare, I noticed that fedora-announce-list
is slow to announce updates as most of the actual updates took place
around the beginning of August by Redhat people. Not sure why that is.

Paul


> -- 
> Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>
> 

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[kashani]

Paul Hoy wrote:
> My original email was 23/24 packages for x86. However, after reading
> your email, I compared the first 10 kde updates with ~x86 releases. It
> came out that Fedora was ahead 50 percent of the time or both distros
> shared the same release versions. In case I'm doing something
> incorrectly, you can also view the updates at
> http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/
> 
> Of course, this new comparison is between testing releases and so-called
> stable Fedora releases. There is a Fedora extras/unstable list (Fedora
> Core 4 Testing Updates) for that, but I don't receive that one. It also
> should be noted that the updates I listed happen to be mostly for Fedora
> 3, not Fedora 4. I compared some Fedora 4 releases the other day and
> shared them with this list and Fedora was ahead 90 percent of the time
> (out of about 10 recent release comparisons).
> 
> Finally, after doing a ~x86 compare, I noticed that fedora-announce-list
> is slow to announce updates as most of the actual updates took place
> around the beginning of August by Redhat people. Not sure why that is.

	I'd be curious as to how long this remains the case. In the past  I've 
seen binary distros leap ahead and they remain fairly up to date for a 
period of time after their initial release. As time progresses they fall 
behind and are unable to add software that requires newer core libs than 
the ones they shipped with or releases that are too different from the 
previous release. They continue falling further behind until the next 
major release and the cycle starts again.

	Assuming the above is correct outside my own experiences I'd trade 
short bursts of current packages with a 6-8 month reinstall for long 
term "just shy of bleeding edge." Afterall the mail server that sent 
this started its life as Gentoo v1.2 three years ago.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Rumen Yotov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2518 bytes --]

Hi,
Paul Hoy wrote:

>On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 13:11 +1200, Nick Rout wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 20:58:54 -0400
>>Paul Hoy wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Coincidently, I received a bunch of Fedora 3 & 4 email
>>>updates earlier today, which shows that Gentoo is behind 23 out of 24 of
>>>the updates, some of them quite significantly. Most of them are
>>>KDE-related files,
>>>      
>>>
>>That confirms my thoughts (which i posted yesterday).
>>
>>So can you clarify, is that 23/24 packages are behind on x86 or on ~x86?
>>
>>i.e. would an ~x86 gentoo be ahead or behind fedora?
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
Here also comes the question of "how far behind " as if it's a day or
even a week that's nothing IMHO :p

>My original email was 23/24 packages for x86. However, after reading
>your email, I compared the first 10 kde updates with ~x86 releases. It
>came out that Fedora was ahead 50 percent of the time or both distros
>shared the same release versions. In case I'm doing something
>incorrectly, you can also view the updates at
>http://fedoraproject.org/infofeed/
>
>Of course, this new comparison is between testing releases and so-called
>stable Fedora releases. There is a Fedora extras/unstable list (Fedora
>Core 4 Testing Updates) for that, but I don't receive that one. It also
>should be noted that the updates I listed happen to be mostly for Fedora
>3, not Fedora 4. I compared some Fedora 4 releases the other day and
>shared them with this list and Fedora was ahead 90 percent of the time
>(out of about 10 recent release comparisons).
>
>Finally, after doing a ~x86 compare, I noticed that fedora-announce-list
>is slow to announce updates as most of the actual updates took place
>around the beginning of August by Redhat people. Not sure why that is.
>
>Paul
>
>  
>
Another thing "Fedora" is still closely related with RedHat (a child
of), so being a paid Distro they have more resources/people etc.
Gentoo is made/supported by non-paid devs so there must be a difference
after all.
Still another thought - see Ubuntu's fast rise, made by having mostly
Debian unstable/testing packages with some customizations. IMO newest
not is always the best (depends on the perspective of course).
When running a ~x86 for some 6-7 months sometimes (not very often)
bumped on a Bug, which only hours at most a day/two afterwards was
solved, so being "on front line" requires much more time/resources then
"a little behind".
Just my thoughts.
Rumen

>  
>
>>-- 
>>Nick Rout <nick@rout.co.nz>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3397 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Jerry McBride]

On Sunday 14 August 2005 03:42 pm, Paul Hoy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This email isn't intended to troll, but to explore Linux variants
> that share certain characteristics.
>

Nice way to introduce yourself on a distribution support maillist.... :')

> I really like Gentoo and I like that fact that it does a pretty good
> job at supporting Gnome, however, it's still behind other releases,
> such as Fedora, in terms of when it releases updates, etc.
>

Huh?

> Linux from Scratch looks very interesting: it appears to rapidly
> support the latest updates and it has decent documentation. Does any
> one have any perspectives on Linux from Scratch, from a Gentoo point-
> of-view? Does anyone wish to share a comparison of the two?
>

Yeah, sure... Gentoo is more fun.

As for being "behind other releases"... you gotta-be-kiddin....

What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?


-- 

******************************************************************************
                     Registered Linux User Number 185956
              FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
             Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
    Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
     4:46pm  up 27 days, 16:45,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo or Linux from Scratch - Perspectives?

[Jerry McBride]

On Sunday 14 August 2005 06:06 pm, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> On Sunday 21 August 2005 22:05, Jerry McBride wrote:
> > What and where EXACTLY is gentoo behind any other release?
>
> gcc4
>
> since fedora switched to gcc4, all the version-number-junkies got itchy.
>
> Is not too bad, if some of them go to fedora...

We must not be on the same page.... If you WANT gcc4 you can certainly have it 
in Gentoo.

-- 

******************************************************************************
                     Registered Linux User Number 185956
              FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
             Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
    Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
     7:18pm  up 27 days, 19:17,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list