Corporate creep in Linux? (mini-rantette)
in [Slackware]
|
From: Robby Workman on 16 Sep 2009 15:55 On 2009-09-16, wexfordpress <john(a)wexfordpress.com> wrote: > > The problem with all slackbuilds or whatever for Inkscape lie in the > library requirements. You have to get the right library of the right > version to match all the other libraries. I wasted some days fiddling > with this process with no success at all. I'm not sure how to make it any clearer, to be honest. First, go here: http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/graphics/inkscape/ Note that there is a link to the source tarball - use THAT version. Note the README - it says (and I quote): "Inkscape requires gc, gsl, libsigc++, glibmm, cairomm, pangomm, and gtkmm." That means you're going to need all of those things. I'm not sure why this part needs an explanation, but if we require something in a build, then we'll provide that something. In other words, you simply navigate your mouse up to the search box, type in "gc" and press enter. That leads to this: http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/development/gc/ Repeat the process for the other ones and you'll get these: http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/libraries/gsl/ http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/libraries/libsigc++/ http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/libraries/glibmm/ http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/libraries/cairomm/ http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/libraries/pangomm/ http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/libraries/gtkmm/ In fact, this one was *very* easy, because I noted the *entire* dependency chain in the inkscape README - you'll often have to grab dependencies of dependencies too, but not this time. There's more information (required reading, to be honest) at http://slackbuilds.org/howto/ You might find it easier to use sbopkg, which you can find at http://sbopkg.org -RW
From: Mike Jones on 16 Sep 2009 19:17 Responding to Sylvain Robitaille: > Mike Jones wrote: > >> ... >> "Full", "Menu", "Light" The "Light" being something like a stripped >> down OS with JWM or IceWM stuck on top of a basic but functional system >> that just had enough bits in it, approporiately configured, to provide >> a fast dependable OS for basic functions like Abiword word processing, >> Dillo2 surfing, Sylpheed email, Pan usenet, Bashburn for disk burning, >> and so on. > > Your "light" option seems to be largely based on software that doesn't > get installed in the distribution's "full" option. Ironic, that. But I still end up with stuff like udev, which is where we started. Spoing! ;) -- *===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/ *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/ *===( http://www.slackware.com/
From: Mike Jones on 16 Sep 2009 19:21 Responding to Keith Keller: > On 2009-09-16, Mike Jones <Not(a)Arizona.Bay> wrote: >> >> The solution to this is to (slightly) extend whats available in a >> standard Slackware install, to include alternative setups to the ever >> expanding defaults. This is already in operation as an idea, what with >> alternative desktops like KDE or Xfce etc., but IMO it needs to be >> extended to include alternatives to the bloaty stuff, so that a >> standard Slacker (and noobz) can simply chose an installation set that >> IS a lightweight OS, straight off the install DVD. > > Didn't people already mention that blackbox is an installation option? > If that's not a nonbloaty WM option I don't know what is. (And FWIW I > think twm is still part of the Xorg packages.) > >> Hmmm. I like this idea. > > Are you going to implement it? ISTM you need two things: a) a set of > tags to tell the installer what to install, and b) the packages you > mentioned but that are not included with Slackware, as Sylvain > mentioned. Not trivial, but certainly not incredibly difficult either. > > --keith Funny you should mention that... ;) I'll post up when I get something in a functional BETA state. Still got that problem with the semi-autos like udev though. Pah! (functional = I can do it /before/ coffee.) -- *===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/ *===( http://principiadiscordia.com/ *===( http://www.slackware.com/
From: ~kurt on 16 Sep 2009 21:27 notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: > > No kidding. I dumped kde in favor of fluxbox and love it. Got back I finally switched to fluxbox from blackbox given how long it had been since anyone had maintained it. - Kurt
From: Chick Tower on 17 Sep 2009 22:29
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:27:16 -0500, ~kurt wrote: > notbob <notbob(a)nothome.com> wrote: >> >> No kidding. I dumped kde in favor of fluxbox and love it. Got back > > I finally switched to fluxbox from blackbox given how long it had been > since anyone had maintained it. > > - Kurt Is there much differnce between the two, Kurt? I use Fluxbox with low-end (P3, P2, K6-2) CPUs, but I've not tried Blackbox. -- Chick Tower For e-mail: aols2 DOT sent DOT towerboy AT xoxy DOT net |