Mailing List Archive

Hi,

Besides that, were you actually able to use the desktop? A good while back
I was having issues with newer GCCs, HAL, consolekit and other parts of the
desktop's subsystem.

My experience is ABI_X86 has unfortunately introduced conflicts everywhere,
not just on this overlay.

Tiago

On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Brent Busby <brent@keycorner.org> wrote:

> Since the introduction of ABI_X86 and 32-bit libraries all over the
> place, I've seen lots of slot conflicts and unresolvables with the
> kde-sunset packages. Has anyone else seen this when updating? Is it
> time to finally say guten Nacht to the sunset overlay?
>
> --
> + Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
> + Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
> + University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
> + James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
> + Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
>
>

Tiago Marques <tiagomnm@gmail.com> writes:

> Besides that, were you actually able to use the desktop? A good while
> back I was having issues with newer GCCs, HAL, consolekit and other
> parts of the desktop's subsystem.
>
> My experience is ABI_X86 has unfortunately introduced conflicts
> everywhere, not just on this overlay.

Up until now, I've been able to find ways around everything. There was
always some patch to get around most (but not all) GCC issues. I got
around HAL by not using it, and using the KDE 4 version of programs like
K3B that cared about HAL. I got around consolekit by just making my
launch of KDE include 'exec ck-launch-session dbus-launch --sh-syntax
--exit-with-session startkde', which registers the session. (Later I
just globally got rid of consolekit, since it's pretty annoying even
outside of KDE, as is policykit, and all those kits.)

But I've got no solution for this. It doesn't appear to be all
multilib's fault though. It looks like all packages that used to be
under kde-base/ in main Portage are now under kde-apps/, and this
expectation has carried across into the overlay somehow. Since the
overlay is not updated for this, it's causing most of KDE 3 to appear to
be missing to Portage...or at least that's how it looks so far.

I may just give it up. I mostly wanted KDE 3 to continue for two
things, now no longer necessary for me:

- I had it configured to look like CDE. Yes I know lots of people think
CDE is ugly, but I like it, and KDE 4 is incapable of getting that
look quite to the degree KDE 3 could. It doesn't matter so much now
that real OpenGroup CDE has been open-sourced and is being vigorously
supported by community people who care about it. You can now make
your Linux workstation look like HP-UX til the end of time if you
want.

- I liked the HTML editor Quanta, which is a QT3 only program. Lately
though, I've been becoming more and more of an Emacs person. (It's
got me. GNU Emacs happens to people when they least expect it.) As
part of that growing disease, I've become attached to Emacs' various
modes and assistants for HTML, CSS, Javascript, etc., so I don't
really need Quanta so much anymore either.

Oh well...farewell KDE 3.

--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky

On Fri, 03 Jul 2015 19:20:21 -0500
Brent Busby <brent@keycorner.org> wrote:

> Tiago Marques <tiagomnm@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Besides that, were you actually able to use the desktop? A good while
> > back I was having issues with newer GCCs, HAL, consolekit and other
> > parts of the desktop's subsystem.
> >
> > My experience is ABI_X86 has unfortunately introduced conflicts
> > everywhere, not just on this overlay.
>
> But I've got no solution for this. It doesn't appear to be all
> multilib's fault though. It looks like all packages that used to be
> under kde-base/ in main Portage are now under kde-apps/, and this
> expectation has carried across into the overlay somehow. Since the
> overlay is not updated for this, it's causing most of KDE 3 to appear to
> be missing to Portage...or at least that's how it looks so far.

It's fixable:

cd /var/db/pkg/
cp -r kde-apps/* kde-base/

The last set of profile changes performed a slot-move on a bunch of KDE
packages in a way that was inappropriate for KDE3. This copies the files
involved back to their old locations, making Portage acknowledge the packages
under their old names again. Check kde-base afterwards for unmoored
symlinks and delete any you find.

E. Liddell

150703 Brent Busby wrote:
> I may just give it up. I mostly wanted KDE 3 to continue
> for two things, now no longer necessary for me:
> - I had it configured to look like CDE.
> - I liked the HTML editor Quanta, which is a QT3 only program.
> Oh well...farewell KDE 3.

There are 3 KDE 3 apps which I want to go on using
& which have no adequate (SIC) equivalent in KDE 4 ,
ie kmahjongg ksokoban kworldclock . Is it beyond an update of some sort ?

--
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Correction to previous message: "mv kde-apps/* kde-base/", not "cp -r"--
having two copies around may confuse Portage on some operations. It
may also be necessary afterwards to edit /var/lib/portage/world and
other supporting files to revert unwanted kde/apps instances to
kde/base.

E. Liddell

"E. Liddell" <ejlddll@googlemail.com> writes:

> Correction to previous message: "mv kde-apps/* kde-base/", not "cp -r"--
> having two copies around may confuse Portage on some operations. It
> may also be necessary afterwards to edit /var/lib/portage/world and
> other supporting files to revert unwanted kde/apps instances to
> kde/base.

Should we really be going in that direction? For whatever reason,
Gentoo main has decided it's kde-apps now. Shouldn't we try to conform
the overlay to that rather than locally kludge the main Portage tree to
match the overlay?

--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky

On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 3:37 AM, Brent Busby <brent@keycorner.org> wrote:

> "E. Liddell" <ejlddll@googlemail.com> writes:
>
> > Correction to previous message: "mv kde-apps/* kde-base/", not "cp -r"--
> > having two copies around may confuse Portage on some operations. It
> > may also be necessary afterwards to edit /var/lib/portage/world and
> > other supporting files to revert unwanted kde/apps instances to
> > kde/base.
>
> Should we really be going in that direction? For whatever reason,
> Gentoo main has decided it's kde-apps now. Shouldn't we try to conform
> the overlay to that rather than locally kludge the main Portage tree to
> match the overlay?
>

​Seems like a good idea. Did someone actually follow up on a previous
request for a maintainer for the overlay?

Tiago


>
> --
> + Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
> + Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
> + University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
> + James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
> + Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
>
>

Quite the hassle. I would suggest maybe you try Trinity Desktop as a
replacement. I haven't tried it in a while but it generally was ok at a
functional KDE3 desktop that is compatible with modern system-related
libraries. They usually ported a larger number of old KDE 3 apps on
request, though I'm not sure how it stands right now.

For lovers of the old code base, there was a guy who added patches for
udiks and upower to the old code and fixed GCC compile bugs, though I have
stopped following new developments a good while back. My understanding is
that if you mostly only wanted old stuff, it was your best option and it
was being built for OpenSUSE distros for people that wanted to try it out
without going all the way to TDE packages.

Tiago

On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:20 AM, Brent Busby <brent@keycorner.org> wrote:

> Tiago Marques <tiagomnm@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Besides that, were you actually able to use the desktop? A good while
> > back I was having issues with newer GCCs, HAL, consolekit and other
> > parts of the desktop's subsystem.
> >
> > My experience is ABI_X86 has unfortunately introduced conflicts
> > everywhere, not just on this overlay.
>
> Up until now, I've been able to find ways around everything. There was
> always some patch to get around most (but not all) GCC issues. I got
> around HAL by not using it, and using the KDE 4 version of programs like
> K3B that cared about HAL. I got around consolekit by just making my
> launch of KDE include 'exec ck-launch-session dbus-launch --sh-syntax
> --exit-with-session startkde', which registers the session. (Later I
> just globally got rid of consolekit, since it's pretty annoying even
> outside of KDE, as is policykit, and all those kits.)
>
> But I've got no solution for this. It doesn't appear to be all
> multilib's fault though. It looks like all packages that used to be
> under kde-base/ in main Portage are now under kde-apps/, and this
> expectation has carried across into the overlay somehow. Since the
> overlay is not updated for this, it's causing most of KDE 3 to appear to
> be missing to Portage...or at least that's how it looks so far.
>
> I may just give it up. I mostly wanted KDE 3 to continue for two
> things, now no longer necessary for me:
>
> - I had it configured to look like CDE. Yes I know lots of people think
> CDE is ugly, but I like it, and KDE 4 is incapable of getting that
> look quite to the degree KDE 3 could. It doesn't matter so much now
> that real OpenGroup CDE has been open-sourced and is being vigorously
> supported by community people who care about it. You can now make
> your Linux workstation look like HP-UX til the end of time if you
> want.
>
> - I liked the HTML editor Quanta, which is a QT3 only program. Lately
> though, I've been becoming more and more of an Emacs person. (It's
> got me. GNU Emacs happens to people when they least expect it.) As
> part of that growing disease, I've become attached to Emacs' various
> modes and assistants for HTML, CSS, Javascript, etc., so I don't
> really need Quanta so much anymore either.
>
> Oh well...farewell KDE 3.
>
> --
> + Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
> + Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
> + University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
> + James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
> + Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
>
>

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015 09:04:45 +0100
Tiago Marques <tiagomnm@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 3:37 AM, Brent Busby <brent@keycorner.org> wrote:
>
> > "E. Liddell" <ejlddll@googlemail.com> writes:
> >
> > > Correction to previous message: "mv kde-apps/* kde-base/", not "cp -r"--
> > > having two copies around may confuse Portage on some operations. It
> > > may also be necessary afterwards to edit /var/lib/portage/world and
> > > other supporting files to revert unwanted kde/apps instances to
> > > kde/base.
> >
> > Should we really be going in that direction? For whatever reason,
> > Gentoo main has decided it's kde-apps now. Shouldn't we try to conform
> > the overlay to that rather than locally kludge the main Portage tree to
> > match the overlay?
> >
>
> ​Seems like a good idea. Did someone actually follow up on a previous
> request for a maintainer for the overlay?

That, I think, is the main question. Moving the packages shouldn't be
difficult, but is there anyone around who still even has commit rights
for the overlay?

E. Liddell

"E. Liddell" <ejlddll@googlemail.com> writes:

> That, I think, is the main question. Moving the packages shouldn't be
> difficult, but is there anyone around who still even has commit rights
> for the overlay?

Have we seen Ladislav Laska around lately? I provided him with some FTP
mirror space for the overlay awhile back.

--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky

On 04/07/15 09:25, Brent Busby wrote:
> Since the introduction of ABI_X86 and 32-bit libraries all over the
> place, I've seen lots of slot conflicts and unresolvables with the
> kde-sunset packages. Has anyone else seen this when updating? Is it
> time to finally say guten Nacht to the sunset overlay?
>

Can you please paste the errors? I'm happy to try to fix specific issues.

Michael Palimaka <kensington@gentoo.org> writes:

> On 04/07/15 09:25, Brent Busby wrote:
>> Since the introduction of ABI_X86 and 32-bit libraries all over the
>> place, I've seen lots of slot conflicts and unresolvables with the
>> kde-sunset packages. Has anyone else seen this when updating? Is it
>> time to finally say guten Nacht to the sunset overlay?
>
> Can you please paste the errors? I'm happy to try to fix specific issues.

I've already removed as many kde-sunset packages as was needed to make
the update proceed, so I can no longer reproduce the errors. Most of
the effect of it was that it couldn't find packages in kde-apps/ because
kde-sunset still has them in kde-base/. I'm finding that I don't really
need the overlay too much anymore though, so I've been trimming it away
over time.

--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ Sr. UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ James Franck Institute + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ Materials Research Ctr + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky