From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9BCE138A1C for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 12:17:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AC1A7E0982; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 12:17:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f53.google.com (mail-wg0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AABEE08B1 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 12:17:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id l18so3473982wgh.26 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 04:17:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=slwt26+rlGmUfZ4aaAEHfFYN9VGG7IOubpGBdqLn2YA=; b=Wl0aX8eaepm/XxdZIfAakvWjsDjiWx7AYkJaJ7RRxKfcdNwKpFTPALy+9fdCQjvYpv 85dsUT2r6U+BHEzlQn1hylObspIC3Zz1IkHlKVJmLp9B49EPbxgYTJS7IV/8H6I4aebs b7iVS2DSidoGhuWc9Rr1nX4GNij2Dqz3xl1DzN7oKNN9Gx3jAbr4tT5g8DIjwFmioyRc 5YVfECaGTwAZLTBnYdCB2pPFCJAiHpVJttMS5FEEuQ7E7hfRHUmdUQEL4OSq1KQqAHfy KbZFRDwIqFjhySVkvJK2AscU+WlM9uT/Uooa4ggQeN9nHRz/z2i55/2Hhuna/v9CUEFj wcBQ== X-Received: by 10.180.21.210 with SMTP id x18mr15047889wie.19.1416485822069; Thu, 20 Nov 2014 04:17:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from cosmo ([193.200.85.246]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ge17sm3864662wic.0.2014.11.20.04.17.01 for (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Nov 2014 04:17:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <546ddbbd.11bdb40a.6185.3990@mx.google.com> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 14:15:22 +0200 From: Gevisz To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] no-emul profiles In-Reply-To: <20141120000530.61b28f0f@marcec.fritz.box> References: <546d075d.4109980a.79dd.0415@mx.google.com> <20141120000530.61b28f0f@marcec.fritz.box> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 1731880a-c43c-48b4-9929-e244f3776fb4 X-Archives-Hash: 970dd44238e8bd9de1d3e81125e9885a On Thu, 20 Nov 2014 00:05:30 +0100 Marc Joliet wrote: > Am Wed, 19 Nov 2014 23:09:16 +0200 > schrieb Gevisz : > > > Looking into profile list, I have found out new, > > at least for me, no-emul profiles. (As far as I > > remember, they were not there one and a half > > years ago, when I installed my first Gentoo system.) > > > > I tried to google something about them but have > > found virtually nothing except for the following > > wiki page: http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Multilib_System_without_emul-linux_Packages > > > > It is not about profiles at all but I guess that > > no-emul profile provides the same result while > > installing the system. > > > > Am I right? > > In short: yes, I think so. > > It Looks to me like a new profile that uses proper multilib (something that > some Gentoo devs have been working on for several years now, in fact) instead > of the pre-compiled 32 bit packages (app-emulation/emul-linux-*), so that now, > finally, (some) packages can be compiled for both 32 and 64 bits. Specifically, > I think it is explicitly for wine users. > > Actually, I'm mildly excited that proper multilib (at least for amd64) appears > to be nearing completion, or at least a usable state. > > > If so, I have a few more questions: > > > > Is it stable? > > > > Is it worth to choose it while installing a new Gentoo system? > > No clue about these two, since I haven't tried it, but I've never heard of > "experimental" profiles, I have seen such a warning when googling about uclibc profile (but it is hard to say when this warning was issued). > so I don't expect it to be broken (but see below). > Anyway, I just switched to default/linux/amd64/13.0/no-emul-linux-x86/desktop > as an experiment and am waiting for emerge @world to finish :) . Thank you for trying it. :) > So the no-emul-linux-x86 profiles are fairly simple: they unmask the abi_x86_32 > USE flag (at least for enough packages to satisfy wine's dependency tree), mask > the emul-linux-* packages, and mask some older versions of packages that don't > have the necessary multilib support. I needed to upgrade 5 packages, of which > four (gnutls, texinfo, nettle, and libSM) have open stabilisation bugs. Does not this mean that it is a bit experimental? > The one without was wine, but I don't mind in its case. After that and adding > lots of abi_x86_32 USE flags, portage was able to sort out all blockers by itself > and emerge @world started running successfully. > > There is also a corresponding abi_x86_64 USE flag that remains masked, so you > don't get the full granularity yet, but it will get there eventually :) . What is still unclear for me (but it is not the question to you but to the creators of this profile) is the following: In the wiki page I have mentioned above, is written: "This document will show how to setup a Gentoo ~amd64 system for this new way of dealing with 32bit libraries. A stable amd64 system may not work this way but if the new feature is completely stable, it will be available to all users eventually." That suggests that with the time all these features will be included into the usual default amd64 profile, and thus amd64 no-emul profile seems to be somewhat experimental (at least as to my logic :). If so, will it be abandoned with time or just converge to the default amd64 profile? > > Can I expect that in this case I will be able to install > > and run such applications as, say, wine? > > I would expect so. The wine ebuilds (at least for version 1.7.x) have supported > multilib for a while now (just check the changelog), as an alternative to the > emul-linux-* packages. > > > Thank you. > > HTH Yes, thank you.