slackbuilds.net - Slackware

This is a discussion on slackbuilds.net - Slackware ; I knew http://www.slackbuilds.org but I have found http://www.slackbuilds.net . It is based on the same context (the explanations are in French but you can easily get the build scripts; click on "slackbuilds" and you will find a svn link). They ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 46

Thread: slackbuilds.net

  1. slackbuilds.net

    I knew http://www.slackbuilds.org but I have found
    http://www.slackbuilds.net. It is based on the same context (the
    explanations are in French but you can easily get the build scripts;
    click on "slackbuilds" and you will find a svn link). They have
    apparently more packages (including a set of buildscript for Gnome).
    Anyone knew that? I wonder why two projects are needed.

    Olive

  2. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Hallo, Olive,

    Du meintest am 02.12.07:

    > I knew http://www.slackbuilds.org but I have found
    > http://www.slackbuilds.net. It is based on the same context (the
    > explanations are in French but you can easily get the build scripts;
    > click on "slackbuilds" and you will find a svn link). They have
    > apparently more packages (including a set of buildscript for Gnome).
    > Anyone knew that? I wonder why two projects are needed.


    I need a german site too ...

    Viele Gruesse
    Helmut

    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  3. Re: slackbuilds.net

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    On 2007-12-02, Olive wrote:
    > I knew http://www.slackbuilds.org but I have found
    > http://www.slackbuilds.net. It is based on the same context (the
    > explanations are in French but you can easily get the build scripts;
    > click on "slackbuilds" and you will find a svn link). They have
    > apparently more packages (including a set of buildscript for Gnome).
    > Anyone knew that? I wonder why two projects are needed.


    The two projects are maintained by different groups and with different
    goals. Use whichever you prefer, though fo obvious reasons I prefer
    SBo.

    SBo (my short-hand from slackbuilds.org) tries to make build scripts
    available that are as "true" to how we feel Pat would make them
    himself. In other words, there's no extraneous dependency management
    beyond a README file, everything is pacakged up in /usr, and by and
    large we try to keep them as simple as possible. Each script in our
    repository is checked over by at least 1 member of the admin team to
    ensure that it is "perfect" (for some definition of "perfect"). We try
    to weed out any major problems and ensure that each will compile just
    fine on a stock Slackware installation.

    I cannot speak for slackbuilds.net as I am unfamiliar with that
    project.

    - --
    It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
    Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
    Ecclesiastes 7:5
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHUwrvrZS6hX/gvjoRAlrtAKDf5BdztRZecRAawIE0jTdrRw6NcgCgxmC+
    u/9OjsUj0RlOJTXTUJxcARI=
    =zuyR
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  4. Re: slackbuilds.net

    On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:56:18 +0100
    Olive wrote:

    > I knew http://www.slackbuilds.org but I have found
    > http://www.slackbuilds.net. It is based on the same context (the
    > explanations are in French but you can easily get the build scripts;
    > click on "slackbuilds" and you will find a svn link). They have
    > apparently more packages (including a set of buildscript for Gnome).
    > Anyone knew that?


    You can find more here:

    http://slackworld.berlios.de/links.html

    > I wonder why two projects are needed.


    IMHO, they are needed by the same reason why multiple Linux
    distributions are needed. Maybe just for fun? ;-)

    --
    Mikhail

  5. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Olive wrote:
    > I wonder why two projects are needed.


    Because slackbuilds.org does not support fakeroot (or you have to
    execute all the script with fakeroot, which sometimes fails).

    Both disregard an important point though: they install in /usr by
    default, whereas they *should* install in /usr/local (that's why PV set
    $PATH as /usr/local:...)

  6. Re: slackbuilds.net

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    I say !

    no sorry, I'm using aioe server, an open nntp server, and sometime it
    seems to have some problem : give my client an error (about size) but
    the msg seem to pass anyway.

    another time, sorry for repetitions.
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHUxoB9sCa4LW0nIwRAsYlAJ9VLrWa8u/8YEzsH5isy9P1qP3SXgCfaJOo
    iTWggMGmFp4rLv8gIPZJm7w=
    =8mLh
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  7. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Jérôme PRIOR says:

    pgp trash troll delete

    >I say !


    >no sorry, I'm using aioe server, an open nntp server, and sometime
    >it seems to have some problem : give my client an error (about
    >size) but the msg seem to pass anyway.


    It's the pgp that's doing it. Try removing pgp from all of your
    applications.

    cordially, as always,

    rm

  8. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Hallo, ciol,

    Du meintest am 02.12.07:

    >> I wonder why two projects are needed.


    > Because slackbuilds.org does not support fakeroot (or you have to
    > execute all the script with fakeroot, which sometimes fails).


    > Both disregard an important point though: they install in /usr by
    > default, whereas they *should* install in /usr/local (that's why PV
    > set $PATH as /usr/local:...)


    No - "/usr/local" is for my very private packets. Not for "world wide"
    packages close to the official packets.

    Viele Gruesse
    Helmut

    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  9. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Helmut Hullen wrote:
    > No - "/usr/local" is for my very private packets. Not for "world wide"
    > packages close to the official packets.


    NO.
    /usr/local is for _all_ packages which are not official.
    What if you have package X from slackbuild, not in slackware 12, but
    that will be in slackware 13?

  10. Re: slackbuilds.net

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Realto Margarino wrote:
    > J?r?me PRIOR says:
    >
    > pgp trash troll delete
    >
    >>I say !

    >
    >>no sorry, I'm using aioe server, an open nntp server, and sometime
    >>it seems to have some problem : give my client an error (about
    >>size) but the msg seem to pass anyway.

    >
    > It's the pgp that's doing it. Try removing pgp from all of your
    > applications.


    We tried removing your mother, but that didn't help us with
    you, did it..?

    BL.
    - --
    Brad Littlejohn | Email: tyketto@sbcglobal.net
    Unix Systems Administrator, | tyketto@ozemail.com.au
    Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
    PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHU13yyBkZmuMZ8L8RAmWoAJwLnP+Qkzp+jhRfJdWe9+ nokcRrqQCaAjfD
    KGoSfMHExbgBj5SXb6TSwWY=
    =Oj9M
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  11. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Hallo, ciol,

    Du meintest am 02.12.07:

    >> No - "/usr/local" is for my very private packets. Not for "world
    >> wide" packages close to the official packets.


    > NO.
    > /usr/local is for _all_ packages which are not official.
    > What if you have package X from slackbuild, not in slackware 12, but
    > that will be in slackware 13?


    In the last years (more than 5 years) that has happened often. Seamless.
    My major non official source is "linuxpackages.net", and all packages
    I've got there the (many) last years don't use "/usr/local". And that's
    the way I want.
    If Patrick takes a packet from there to the official site nothing else
    has to be changed.

    By the way: "PATH" prefers "/usr/local/bin". If Patrick takes a packet
    from "linuxpackages.net" to the official site which uses "/usr/local/
    bin" then calling the application without path always would lead to the
    non official version. That's nothing I want.

    Viele Gruesse
    Helmut

    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  12. Re: slackbuilds.net

    ciol wrote:
    > Because slackbuilds.org does not support fakeroot (or you have to
    > execute all the script with fakeroot, which sometimes fails).


    If a script fails to execute with fakeroot, then you may fix it and post
    the fix to the mailing list. I'm sure the fix will be added.

    I test the scripts, I want to contribute to SBo, with fakeroot for the
    first time, and so far this always worked.

    > Both disregard an important point though: they install in /usr by
    > default, whereas they *should* install in /usr/local (that's why PV set
    > $PATH as /usr/local:...)


    /usr/local not always works. At least for libraries, this may cause
    trouble.

    CU

    Manuel


  13. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Manuel Reimer wrote:
    > ciol wrote:
    >> Because slackbuilds.org does not support fakeroot (or you have to
    >> execute all the script with fakeroot, which sometimes fails).

    >
    > If a script fails to execute with fakeroot, then you may fix it and post
    > the fix to the mailing list. I'm sure the fix will be added.


    The main problem is that you should not compile and especially
    ../configure in a fakeroot environment. The ./configure auto detect some
    setting of the system and these settings could not correspond in a
    fakeroot environment. Although it might still work for individual
    packages it is definitively not a good practice. The proper way to use
    fakeroot is just to put the correct permission / ownership in the
    packages (as well as create special files, mainly in /dev but these are
    managed by udev these days).

    Olive

  14. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Le Sun, 02 Dec 2007 19:43:26 +0000, +Alan Hicks+ a écritÂ*:

    > I cannot speak for slackbuilds.net as I am unfamiliar with that project.


    I'm somehow familiar with the project. The project leader Nicolas Parein
    aka _Hitek_ was so kind to teach me the basics of writing SlackBuild
    scripts a few years ago.

    The scripts on slackbuilds.net are quite clean, and they build Slackware
    packages like those on slackbuilds.org. I see two major differences,
    maybe three.

    1) The scripts invariably use fakeroot to avoid damage. I see the point
    in that, but I never use it, since wrecking my entire system with an rm -
    rf $TMP and an unset TMP variable only happened once to me, but I still
    remember the feeling. IMHO, using fakeroot is like riding a bicycle with
    two supplementary rear wheels. ('fakeroot' is for sissies. I use
    '****root', a technique where the slightest typo results in a major
    breakdown of my whole LAN D)

    2) The scripts all contain a wget download routine, so they take care of
    fetching the sources for you, and checking their integrity with a simple
    md5sum check.

    3) The third difference I see is the availability of some "packs" like
    for instance the GNOME packages. I gave the gnome-minimal pack a shot
    lately, but it failed to build, so I wrote my own instead (... only to
    find out that I hate GNOME anyway, but that's another story D).

    cheers,

    Niki

  15. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Helmut Hullen wrote:
    > Hallo, ciol,
    >
    > Du meintest am 02.12.07:
    >
    >>> No - "/usr/local" is for my very private packets. Not for "world
    >>> wide" packages close to the official packets.

    >
    >> NO.
    >> /usr/local is for _all_ packages which are not official.
    >> What if you have package X from slackbuild, not in slackware 12, but
    >> that will be in slackware 13?

    >
    > In the last years (more than 5 years) that has happened often. Seamless.
    > My major non official source is "linuxpackages.net", and all packages
    > I've got there the (many) last years don't use "/usr/local". And that's
    > the way I want.
    > If Patrick takes a packet from there to the official site nothing else
    > has to be changed.


    Although I am not sure that to use /usr/local for a tested and widely
    available package; your argument is bad. If PV want to include one of
    these packages in the official release, he will not do it without
    reading the corresponding ./Slackbuild script and changing the scripts
    to use /usr instead of /usr/local (or vice versa) is just trivial.

    Olive

  16. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Niki Kovacs wrote:
    > Le Sun, 02 Dec 2007 19:43:26 +0000, +Alan Hicks+ a écrit :
    >
    >> I cannot speak for slackbuilds.net as I am unfamiliar with that project.

    >
    > I'm somehow familiar with the project. The project leader Nicolas Parein
    > aka _Hitek_ was so kind to teach me the basics of writing SlackBuild
    > scripts a few years ago.
    >
    > The scripts on slackbuilds.net are quite clean, and they build Slackware
    > packages like those on slackbuilds.org. I see two major differences,
    > maybe three.
    >
    > 1) The scripts invariably use fakeroot to avoid damage. I see the point
    > in that, but I never use it, since wrecking my entire system with an rm -
    > rf $TMP and an unset TMP variable only happened once to me, but I still
    > remember the feeling. IMHO, using fakeroot is like riding a bicycle with
    > two supplementary rear wheels. ('fakeroot' is for sissies. I use
    > '****root', a technique where the slightest typo results in a major
    > breakdown of my whole LAN D)


    The Unix philosophy is "never be root unles you really have too" and the
    fact is that you do not have to be root to build packages. I much prefer
    the way Slackbuilds.net do. Although for a well tested script as the
    official ones (and maybe also the slackbuilds.org packages) this might
    not be a problem; it can be a problem for the person that write the
    scripts. It can also be a problem if for some reason someone want to
    modify an official script.

    >
    > 2) The scripts all contain a wget download routine, so they take care of
    > fetching the sources for you, and checking their integrity with a simple
    > md5sum check.


    This is a very weak difference. I have a small script that automatically
    download the slackbuilds.org packages (you just type downslack in the
    directory in which the .SlackBuild file resides. Here it is

    ---------------------------
    #! /bin/sh

    set -e
    eval $( cat *.info | grep DOWNLOAD= )
    wget -T 20 -c $DOWNLOAD
    ----------------------------

    But the sclakbuilds.net approach is not a bad idea.

    >
    > 3) The third difference I see is the availability of some "packs" like
    > for instance the GNOME packages. I gave the gnome-minimal pack a shot
    > lately, but it failed to build, so I wrote my own instead (... only to
    > find out that I hate GNOME anyway, but that's another story D).


    You say that gnome minimal fail to build? Have you see this in the build
    script?

    #!/bin/sh

    # /!\ Ce script est Ã* executer en tant qu'utilisateur ROOT /!\
    # /!\ You must run this script as ROOT /!\

    set -e

    # *MODIFY THIS VARIABLE!* Normal user account (eg /home/your-user/)
    USER=hitek
    [...]

    I do not like gnome but I like some of the gnome apps. What I would like
    is the necessary gnome libraries to buils gnome packages but without the
    whole gnome desktop.

    Olive

  17. Re: slackbuilds.net

    On 2007-12-03, Manuel Reimer wrote:
    > ciol wrote:

    .....

    > /usr/local not always works. At least for libraries, this may cause
    > trouble.


    I have had many problems with libs in /usr/local/lib when building apps
    from source. Even though that path is in my /etc/ld.so.conf and this
    is where they were put during the process of building the libs from
    source with just ./configure, make, make install.

    I've ended up having to copy them to /usr/lib.

    (this was not in a fakeroot environment)

    Tom

    --
    simpleman.s43
    That would be at gee male


  18. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Le Mon, 03 Dec 2007 10:10:46 +0100, Olive a écritÂ*:

    >
    > The Unix philosophy is "never be root unles you really have too" and the
    > fact is that you do not have to be root to build packages. I much prefer
    > the way Slackbuilds.net do. Although for a well tested script as the
    > official ones (and maybe also the slackbuilds.org packages) this might
    > not be a problem;


    Well, in some rare cases when I have doubts if make install DESTDIR=$PKG
    will work, it can happen that I give it a shot as a normal user. But
    since in any case I have a dedicated build box double-booting on a
    sandbox install, I just don't care about fakeroot.

    I know that bit of UNIX philosophy. But I also know that Patrick V.
    builds all his packages as root. It's a case of "being more royalist than
    the king himself" D

    >
    > This is a very weak difference. I have a small script that automatically
    > download the slackbuilds.org packages (you just type downslack in the
    > directory in which the .SlackBuild file resides.


    Nice idea! Though I usually include a wget routine directly in my own
    scripts, since the whole build on my build box is automated, launched
    from a master build script, and the scripts reside in an SVN tree.

    >
    > You say that gnome minimal fail to build? Have you see this in the build
    > script?
    >
    >
    > # *MODIFY THIS VARIABLE!* Normal user account (eg /home/your-user/)
    > USER=hitek


    Yeah, sure, I saw it. But when I tried it (maybe 2 months ago), some of
    the source directories were badly symlinked, and I just didn't have the
    heart to correct all that manually. Maybe it's been corrected since.

    cheers,

    Niki

  19. Re: slackbuilds.net

    Niki Kovacs wrote:
    > Le Mon, 03 Dec 2007 10:10:46 +0100, Olive a écrit :
    >
    >> The Unix philosophy is "never be root unles you really have too" and the
    >> fact is that you do not have to be root to build packages. I much prefer
    >> the way Slackbuilds.net do. Although for a well tested script as the
    >> official ones (and maybe also the slackbuilds.org packages) this might
    >> not be a problem;

    >
    > Well, in some rare cases when I have doubts if make install DESTDIR=$PKG
    > will work, it can happen that I give it a shot as a normal user. But
    > since in any case I have a dedicated build box double-booting on a
    > sandbox install, I just don't care about fakeroot.


    Instead of dual booting; you can use chroot. You type chroot /newroot
    and you are in the other installation. I often do that to chroot in
    another distribution. Correctly configured (you have to take care of the
    /proc /dev /sys as well as some permissions); you can launch about
    anything in the chroot including 3D apps. This approach is much more
    convenient than to dual boot. But this is a little of this thread; we
    can start a new thread on this subject if someone is interested.

    >
    > I know that bit of UNIX philosophy. But I also know that Patrick V.
    > builds all his packages as root. It's a case of "being more royalist than
    > the king himself" D


    I do not consider P.V. as a "King". He is the maintainer of Slackware
    not a divinity. This approach to build as root is something that I do
    not like but as a whole I still prefer Slackware to other distributions
    especially because there is no tons of patches making the software
    unstable and because I can just configure and tweak my systems without
    having take care of a Debian/Ubuntu/Gentoo/Whatever-way. But if someone
    point me another distribution satisfying these two conditions; i would
    definitively give it a try.

    >> This is a very weak difference. I have a small script that automatically
    >> download the slackbuilds.org packages (you just type downslack in the
    >> directory in which the .SlackBuild file resides.

    >
    > Nice idea! Though I usually include a wget routine directly in my own
    > scripts, since the whole build on my build box is automated, launched
    > from a master build script, and the scripts reside in an SVN tree.


    I agree with you this is a nice idea. But The difference is too weak
    IMHO to justify yet another philosophy.

    Olive

  20. Re: slackbuilds.net

    man ldconfig

    Tom N wrote:
    > On 2007-12-03, Manuel Reimer wrote:
    >> ciol wrote:

    > ....
    >
    >> /usr/local not always works. At least for libraries, this may cause
    >> trouble.

    >
    > I have had many problems with libs in /usr/local/lib when building apps
    > from source. Even though that path is in my /etc/ld.so.conf and this
    > is where they were put during the process of building the libs from
    > source with just ./configure, make, make install.
    >
    > I've ended up having to copy them to /usr/lib.
    >
    > (this was not in a fakeroot environment)
    >
    > Tom
    >


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast