3 Attachment(s)
This time, back to slackware-current, it is nearly complete (just linux-faq, howtos, hexchat, kdevelop-pg-qt and kdevelop-php packages remains), everything else has been built.
New packages like boost, sed and flex introduces incompatibilities with some packages, which need previous version to be built. I enclosed a diff-list of the packages in slackware-current (up to 21/01/2017) and those I built. |
3 Attachment(s)
End of "the game", SFS is complete up to slackware-current-26/01/201, even linux-faqs and linux-howtos.
I enclosed a diff-list of the packages in slackware-current (up to 26/01/2017) and those I built. |
2 Attachment(s)
Nododino,
I've been trying to build Slackware64-14.2 using your scripts from 2017-01-09. Everything seemed okay, except you dropped the patch needed for a2ps, until build4_s.list. Then "make" started seg-faulting. When I checked, the "tools/bin" problem was back. Quote:
attached c.list. No more "tools/bin"lists 2 and 3 built okay. Am about to launch build4_s.list. Will report any errors. Attached are the above mentioned c.list and a patch to sfsinit-r29.sh to add the a2ps patch. Check it out. I tried not to disturb anything on the 32 bit side, but have had no opportunity to test it. |
3 Attachment(s)
Back to slackware-current x86_64 up 26/01/2017.
I built everything, as you can see in the enclosed diff.list for x86_64, nothing is left. I solved the building of p2c, lxc, reiserfsprogs and isapnptools (no more need upgraded packages). I simplified the building of newspost, procmail and seyon (one "sed line" in the SlackBuild). I upgraded preelflibs64/postlibelfs64 (missing ncurces-5.9 and libtermcap). It builds quite the same way as x32 version except for very few packages: xfce, eudev. I reintroduced dlackware, but it's not active by default, I haven't worked on it for several months: Bartgymnast can play with it. |
5 Attachment(s)
Back to slackware-current for x86.
-sfsinit as been split in 4 scripts: patch_generator, list_generator, sources_alteration and sfsinit. -dlackware active: able to build up to xfce. |
1 Attachment(s)
added the list of the dlackware packages built:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
See this post from Alien Bob (Eric Hameleers, one of the core Slackware dev team members) for more details on how Pat and team see Slackware. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Slackware devs do not consider a package that can't be compiled on the installed system a bug. As you yourself stated in that previously linked thread, for a time, windowmaker wasn't able to be recompiled on a more modern Slackware because it didn't support the modern toolchain. But the Slackware devs kept including the pre-compiled package because it didn't need to be rebuilt against newer libraries. If the program needs to be recompiled, then Slackware and team will find any issues and resolve them, but just because someone in the community can't recompile a program does not make it a Slackware bug and Pat will likely disregard any bug reports about it. |
Quote:
I have no problem with WONTFIX. It's just that it doesn't clearly follow to me (though it is understandable in retrospect) from most treatises on distro philosophy I've read over the years that basic problems building a package are just plain not even worth reporting. Either that, or I completely glossed over those parts. Fair enough, though. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
some people invest time to show that building the Slackware world is possible, provide order and dependecy and patch information, but it never goes back into the Slackware project. It is just ignored. this is very sad. if you do not adopt, you are outdated and on the way to extinct, what we see actually happen, even if some who do not want to look outside of their world reject to notice. Well, if you do not go with the time, than you go with the time, that is the alternative. I am total aware that some will now start to cry around as usual, that they do not need change, and that is is OK for them, but actually, that's not true, because non of these people is sitting in a cave with no fire. So adoption is essential. But all this is of course just IMHO |
sorry guys but it could be nice to continue this discussion in another topic: nobodino has already stated in the other topic linked that he's not interested philosophical debates so it's not very nice to pollute also this one...
|
Quote:
|
3 Attachment(s)
Back from the "front".
This time I built an experimental SFS up to build2_s.list (blackbox) with a lot of new packages: - binutils: 2.28 - glibc: 2.25 - gcc: 6.3.0 - xorg-server: 1.19.2 - linux LTS: 4.9.13 I built it with an updated 'tools' (script enclosed), and 50 modified and updated packages (enclosed list in /var/log/packages). I thought it would be more complicated, but there are very few patches needed to achieve this. I enclosed also the build1_s.list which a little different from normal: "lzip" before "ed", and "util-linux" before "glib2". I can't send every modification made to the source tree, but with the version of the package and test each SlackBuild you can do the same. I'll try now to go further up to xfce. Nota: It works like a charm! |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:43 PM. |