| 1 |
Hello, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Tue, 23 Jun 2015, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 4 |
>On Tue, 23 Jun 2015 18:35:32 +0200, David Haller wrote: |
| 5 |
>> >You do know that only the desktop profiles include cups as a default |
| 6 |
>> >USE flag? The one I recommended does not. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> Try compiling icedtea, libreoffice, scribus and whatnot without |
| 9 |
>> pulling in cups, no matter the use-flags. And "sabotaging" the ebuild |
| 10 |
>> and buildsystem to not use cups leads to failed builds, BT,TriedThat :(( |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>The OP wanted to set up a "snappier" system. Java and LibreOffice are |
| 13 |
>not the first programs that spring to mind when I think snappier... |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Well, I use LaTeX anyway for "office", but one needs stuff that mom is |
| 16 |
used to, so one can talk her through stuff, eh? And Java? There's e.g. |
| 17 |
tvbrowser and MediathekView. No need to talk about snappy but I |
| 18 |
digressed from the OP anyway already. I just happily jumped on the |
| 19 |
topic of leaving stuff out that one doesn't need. And generally stuff |
| 20 |
you don't have installed cannot be attacked, esp. such ubiquitously |
| 21 |
used stuff as cups (used by MacOS/iOS too), is an important attack |
| 22 |
vector less installed. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Actually: mom uses libreoffice-calc to edit a .csv file, that is then |
| 25 |
fed to a perl-script by me (via a couple of links on the XFCE/formerly |
| 26 |
WinXP Desktop (via a .cmd batch) calling it differently), that |
| 27 |
generates a LaTeX file using labels.sty that is fed to pdflatex and |
| 28 |
spits out a PDF to be printed on labels, and even starting a |
| 29 |
pdf-viewer to check it before printing ;) Worked just like a charm |
| 30 |
for, ah, about 7+ years without any maintanece required, but |
| 31 |
recentenly, mom must've borked up the charset on saving multiply, |
| 32 |
probably due to changed defaults in libreoffice, looked like double |
| 33 |
encoded utf8, but was borked even beyond that. Manually fixing it |
| 34 |
turned out to be the least work. *Gah*. As mom wanted to weed out |
| 35 |
outdated stuff anyway, she did it, but we talked about it and I'd had |
| 36 |
done it. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Except from that, mom writes her letters and stuff with -writer, and |
| 39 |
has been doing so since 199x (then with StarOffice). |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
>> Why does a GUI (a USER INTERFACE Toolkit fer f*** sake! Not a Printer |
| 42 |
>> Interface!) _ALWAYS_ be able to print (if I interpret the AWT right)? |
| 43 |
>> That's just dumb. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
>No argument there. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
*MEH* :) Yeah, there's a couple of "dumb" deps by upstream, that are |
| 48 |
not configurable and not even easily patched out (I think I have one |
| 49 |
where I could patch, but usually, it's too hardwired in, so to speak). |
| 50 |
Makes you want to grab a fish (fresh from Lutetia), and slap the |
| 51 |
culprit around the head with it ... And boy! Are we in for something |
| 52 |
getting systemd hardwired as a dep ... *cringe* |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
>> [1] speaking of that: I noticed, that when I bork[2] an ebuild in |
| 55 |
>> /usr/local/portage, it gets silently(!) ignored and the one from |
| 56 |
>> /usr/portage is used. The only indication is the flag on the |
| 57 |
>> package e.g. ::gentoo vs. ::local. Only once I move the gentoo |
| 58 |
>> ebuilds into e.g. the .attic subfolder, emerge tells me what's |
| 59 |
>> actually wrong with my ::local ebuild in /usr/local/portage. Have |
| 60 |
>> I overlooked an option of emerge or is that a bug? |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
>ebuild /usr/local/portage/cat/pkg/pkg-x.y.ebuild merge |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
>will use the specific ebuild you give it. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
Got to alias/script that! But it is a clumsy workaround. As your local |
| 67 |
overlay (or any with a higher precedence) should override the base, |
| 68 |
emerge should at least tell you about the problem with the overlay, |
| 69 |
and then e.g. ask to emerge the base (/usr/portage), or abort. How |
| 70 |
about it? I consider it a bug (unless I and Neil overlooked a switch |
| 71 |
to emerge, and even then, I'd be for a different default of that, as |
| 72 |
hey, if I do an overlay, I want to be told if I borked anything there, |
| 73 |
not just almost quietly ignored, but anyways not told the actual |
| 74 |
error, until I remove the /usr/portage version (again: missed option |
| 75 |
to emerge?)) |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
@all: What's your take on this? Have I (and Neil?) missed an option? |
| 78 |
or has emerge a "sort of a bug"? |
| 79 |
|
| 80 |
-dnh, who has not yet ever looked at emerge code, but guessing it |
| 81 |
should not be much of a problem emitting the errors in the overlay |
| 82 |
and some simple handling afterwards ;) |
| 83 |
|
| 84 |
-- |
| 85 |
vi, pr.n. |
| 86 |
A computer program designed to stress-test the use of modal bleeping. |
Archives