- Joined
- Apr 14, 2024
Weird cause I'm also on ~amd64. Are you using
--getbinpkgonly? Reading the manual for emerge --getbinpkg prefers a local build over remote binaries, causing it to try and build the latest LLVM release.The Linux Thread - The Autist's OS of Choice
- Thread starter tehpope
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2024
No, just getbinpkg and binpkg-request-signature
LLVM is a weird package on Gentoo because they force USE_FLAGS for all architectures and have so for years
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2024
I am stupid anyways I didn't realize 20.1.8 isnt out of testing yet so only 20.1.7 has been compiled as a binary, I could be using getbinpkgonly incorrectly but it just worked in the few usecases I didnt want to compile dumb shit for 20+ hours.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2024
I was trying to compile stuff from source, but Librewolf kept getting out of memory errors and a bunch of other non-sense with Node.js. I looked up some threads, and apparently it is a common issue for that package. So, I just said fuck it N went with binaries. But, I'm still compiling a bunch of packages that are smaller.
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2023
The delta between Xorg and Xlibre is still quite small. Grab the Xorg Debian packaging, replace the Xorg source with Xlibre, see what breaks. https://salsa.debian.org/xorg-team/xserver/xorg-server is the Debian packaging. You can look at Arch PKGBUILDs for the two to get a notion of how differently they build. (My read is: not very.) But you can just pack Xlibre into packages named Xorg and everything ought to work transparently from the apt side.
A fully-architected solution would be to create "x11" (or whatever) metapackages which are filled by xorg and xlibre, but I don't get the sense that Debian's going to do that any time soon.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
I'm not at a real computer, but you should just be able to modify the Xlibre package "Provides" in debian/control when you built it. Alternatively the "equivs" package will make help fake dependency packages for you.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2024
A story in three parts
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2021
Those downvotes lmao, these absolute cucks cannot accept that their distro just didn't work for someone.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2024
It's funny cause I ran into the same issue with gpm and ncurses when I was trying to install steam, took all of 2 minutes of googling to figure out why the circular dependency was happening. Ended up disabling gpm completely since I didn't need it anyway.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2022
Most people can't and don't want to read error messages, it says there is a dependency loop, you can just USE=-whatever to handle one of them first, or just disable one of them if you don't really need it like above.
EXT4 performance boost in 6.16
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
If a distribution like this already exists, I'll gladly take a correction, if nothing like it exists consider the following then:
We have Linux distributions actively blocking Canonicals snap and snapd, due to both the closed off, user-hostile, and vendor locked nature of snaps. How easily could a Linux distribution thrive if it actively refused packaging or outright blocking Gnome, KDE, and Wayland in general? I don't mean blocking packages and libraries that happen to support Gnome KDE or Wayland wholesale, but just the desktops/compositors.
Starting with why anyone would block Gnome and KDE:
A) Unpredictable design and increased reliance on systemd
B) Insufferable upstream who act like rotten cunts over reasonable QoL feature requests
As for Wayland being something a distribution could refuse to package:
A) Atrocious lack of accessibility tools which Xorg/Xlibre provides
B) Insufferable upstream who act like rotten cunts over reasonable QoL feature requests
EDIT: spelling.
We have Linux distributions actively blocking Canonicals snap and snapd, due to both the closed off, user-hostile, and vendor locked nature of snaps. How easily could a Linux distribution thrive if it actively refused packaging or outright blocking Gnome, KDE, and Wayland in general? I don't mean blocking packages and libraries that happen to support Gnome KDE or Wayland wholesale, but just the desktops/compositors.
Starting with why anyone would block Gnome and KDE:
A) Unpredictable design and increased reliance on systemd
B) Insufferable upstream who act like rotten cunts over reasonable QoL feature requests
As for Wayland being something a distribution could refuse to package:
A) Atrocious lack of accessibility tools which Xorg/Xlibre provides
B) Insufferable upstream who act like rotten cunts over reasonable QoL feature requests
EDIT: spelling.
GNU Abyss
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 30, 2023
If by desktop you mean not packaging/not encouraging GTK and Wayland, the former is effectively impossible. Every browser has a hard dependency on footfag shit. Not even for anything critical, just the UI, file picker and Gnome's "portals". This will all come to a head when IBM/Red Hat decides to really stomp on the gas toward Wayland. You want to browse the Web, don't you, user?
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
As in only provide the bare minimum dependencies that cannot be avoided, but leaving out the gnome desktop, kde plasma desktop, and the wayland compositors.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
Have you tried Linux Mint? It removes the Ubuntu snaps and the Cinnamon desktop environment is quite pleasent and still X11 by default.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2015
Yes that's one distribution that has specifically acted on a stance against snaps. I was going more towards the idea of providing the bare minimum and unavoidable dependencies for gtk/qt but refusing to package the full GNOME and KDE environments due to their anti-user design decisions. This, again, extends to Wayland compositors as a whole due to messy fragmentation and scope creep.
I can see Artix over time just discontinuing their experimental Gnome ISOs and refusing to package the desktop altogether for its user-hostility and increasing dependence on systemd, if not them someone else will just refuse to package anything but the bare minimum libraries for gnome/kde/wayland to maintain compatibility with gtk/qt and without providing actual Gnome and KDE plasma metapackages.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 14, 2024
We are so fucked when Linus dies.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2024
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2024
skill issue.
Well. What I really think it was. The compiler could sense he is an anime nigger, and rejected them.
Things are starting to rely more and more on wayland. The same browsers requiring gtk, also require a few wayland packages, because gtk does now. And will just not work, if those are missing.There maybe could be a way around it, but it would take more effort than just not packaging wayland.
That said. Building a distro around not packaging wayland specifically is a bit ridiculous. It's different than building one that uses a different init, because most people don't want to bother, or don't know how to swap their init themselves, and a lot can go wrong. With mint and ubuntu, I think the fork was a bit more complicated than just snaps. IIRC I can't remember the whole history, but even that is a bit different. With wayland, you can just not use it. Not install any wayland compositors. Unless you are installing a niggerfied distro, that chooses everything for you, you will never be force to start a wayland session.
Blocking gnome, maybe it will make sense for non systemd distros to do that. Because of the gradual increase of systemd dependencies. Which is also going to especially be a problem for the bsd's at some point in the future. So, basically unless they fork it, maintain it themselves, and follow upstream with everything , or just stop updating gnome at all. Or the worst of the options, they could cut out yet another part of systemd, and force it on everyone else again. It's going to cause issues. KDE I don't know if they have hard dependencies on systemd or not. At least more than the average DE, if so I haven't heard about it.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
Is it currently possible to run a wayland only system that does not have X11 installed, bit even to run Xwayland? I'm still a little confused about that because my understanding is that the X11 binaries are still needed for compatibility