[nSLUG] Debian X server help.

Paul Boudreau pbx at eastlink.ca
Wed Mar 3 01:46:22 AST 2004


bdavidso at supercity.ns.ca wrote:

>Hi:
>
>On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Donald Teed wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>You can do ANYTHING with Slackware.
>>>Love those easy installs too.
>>>There's no doubt it's the most under-rated.
>>>      
>>>
>>Can you really do anything?  Try installing evolution 1.4
>>under Slackware 9.0.
>>    
>>
>
>First, since last September 9.1 is the current Slackware version (aside
>from "Slackware-current" which is sort of like the Debian "testing"), so
>for bleeding-edge apps like evolution you probably want to be using the
>latest of whatever distro you use.
>
>Second, never one to shirk a challenge, I decided to take up the gauntlet
>you hurled above.  Of course, I'm not running 9.0, but I am running
>Slackware.  Herewith the details:
>
>1) Go to ximian.com and look at supported OSes -- not surprisingly slak
>isn't there, just RH, Suse, Mandrake.  All fine products, but not slak, so
>a binary package is not available.
>
>2) Source is available, so I go to developer.ximian.com, click on Source
>Code, click on Mirrors, click on first mirror, get not found :(.  Try
>another mirror, lots of directories but no source directory.  Try another
>mirror, and another...
>
>Long story short, the source is available from ftp.ximian.com, but the web
>site doesn't say that and none of the mirrors I checked seemed to have the
>source.
>
>3) OK, the web page also mentions CVS, so I use CVS to get the sources.
>First evolution, then Berkely db-3.1.17 (required version) via ftp from
>Sleepycat, then gal (which installs libgal-2.2.so.0.0.1 - there's a
>confidence builder!), then gtkhtml because the version on my system is v2,
>then the latest gnome-common because I don't have gnome-autogen.sh (which
>you wouldn't need unless you are building from CVS), then something called
>soup which provides libsoup-2.2 -- oops, we need libsoup-3 which comes in
>package libsoup.  Build and install all the sub-packages then try to build
>evolution, oops needs something called libecal, but that's not a package.
>Do a little googling, and find this:
>
>  
>
>>>Does gnome/evolution depend on gnome/evolution-data-server ?
>>>      
>>>
>>Yes. And after that the compile fails in several places. After fixing
>>those, you'll end up with an evo that barely works. Getting it from cvs
>>is worth it, as it is usable (except that contacts and calendar is not
>>imported from 1.4.x). See my cvs instructions in the list archive
>>    
>>
>
>Great, however get, compile, install evolution-data-server.  Configure
>evolution OK this time, build it install it.
>
>Now I have evolution-1.5.4 installed and running on my Slackware 9 system.
>I still don't know about evolutio-1.4, which was your challenge.  Now I
>know where in tarnation the frickin' source code is hidden I might try to
>build from that on my laptop.
>
>Anyway, the upshot is this:  Unless some kind soul out there has bothered
>to build and distribute evolution for slackware (and they have), slak is
>otherwise a bad choice if running evolution is important to you.  So are
>most Linux distributions because ximian only supports less than a handful.
>More to the point, this has nothing to do with slackware, at least at the
>technical level.  Everything required to run that slow, fat, buggy,
>not-yet-ready-for-prime-time application is present, at least as much as
>on any other distro.  Installing it would be a lot easier if the ximian
>website didn't suck.
>
>But if you were maintaining several desktops running slackware and you
>couldn't talk your PHB out of deploying evolution, it would be a small
>matter to prepare your own package.
>
>  
>
>>Slackware has the weakest package management I've seen in any
>>modern Linux distro.
>>    
>>
>
>Or most efficient?
>
>  
>
>>In Slackware you are trapped in a snapshot of time for
>>a certain range of libc and other dependancies.
>>    
>>
>
>What does that mean?
>
>  
>
>>It requires
>>an upgrade of the OS itself, not just packages, to get
>>to a more graduated level of the core dependancies.
>>    
>>
>
>The "OS itself" IS packages.  I have upgraded libc using the slackware
>package tools several times.  You can upgrade the packages glibc-solibs
>etc just like any other distro.  I don't think you have ever used
>Slackware.
>
>  
>
>>Sure you can manually compile your own base level of
>>gcc, libc and friends, but you run the risk of an unknown
>>number of applications breaking.
>>    
>>
>
>If you upgrade your gcc, either by compiling it yourself or via paackage
>tools, and that breaks other apps, then you have done something other than
>upgrade your compiler.
>
>  
>
>>Slackware is fine for setting up a machine with a couple of roles
>>where you don't want a bunch of features, but for a desktop system,
>>it is pain in the ass to set up.
>>    
>>
>
>No, it isn't.  You should try it sometime.
>
>  
>
When I can't find the source code for something, I go to
a Gentoo mirror and download it from there. Another
good cheat is the get a Red Hat source rpm, do rpm -i
(you got rpm on Slackware, right) then you got the tarball
in /usr/src/rpm, or rpm --rebuild *.srpm and make an rpm
of it, install with -nodeps or force.
Or you could go here, and probably find it pre-compiled,
with the dependencies
http://www.linuxpackages.net
or have you been here
http://slackpacks.tchelinux.com.br
Sounds like fun, usually when something is left out of
Slackware, it's for a good reason



More information about the nSLUG mailing list