November 2008 - crux-devel

Meeting notes 2008-11-25
by Juergen Daubert 26 Nov '08

26 Nov '08

Hello, a quick summary of our IRC meeting from yesterday: 1. glibc 2.9 for CRUX 2.5 have done some test with mixed results. All core ports compile fine, but at least one program (mc) is partly broken with 2.9. Because we do not want a delay in the release process of 2.5 we decided to stick with 2.8. 2. hotplug-capable xorg-server is easy to build, just compile xorg-server after installing dbus and hal with deps. To use the feature both daemons must run at start-up of X, which means that a entry in SERVICES should be added as a default. That again would require that dbus and hal become core ports, which we don't want. We change nothing, but Tilman will add a wiki page how to build the xorg-server with hotplug capabilities. 3. Matt volunteers to build a 2.5 release candidate as soon as possible, if we do not run in bigger problems with that, the final should be possible within 2 weeks. Greetings Juergen -- Juergen Daubert | mailto:jue@jue.li Korb, Germany | http://jue.li/crux

1 0

IRC meeting reminder
by Juergen Daubert 25 Nov '08

25 Nov '08

Hello, Here's a reminder for our IRC meeting today. Main topic is our upcoming release, in particular two potentially but not so trivial last minute changes: * update to glibc 2.9 * hotplug-capable xorg-server Looking forward to seeing you at 20 CEST in #crux-devel. Greetings Juergen -- Juergen Daubert | mailto:jue@jue.li Korb, Germany | http://jue.li/crux

1 0

Re: [crux-devel] Notes about test3
by Ricardo Oliveira 19 Nov '08

19 Nov '08

> thanks for the report and testing. no problem! > That's something I cannot reproduce. Formating a 10G partition with ext3 took around 5.6 sec for me with a installed CRUX 2.4 and 2.5, the same time for formating with a booted test3. I made a quick measure of the "problems" i mentioned, the results: Machine #1 Boot until prompt: 2.4: 39 sec 2.5 TEST3: 1 min, 4 sec mkfs.ext3 29000MB partition 2.4: 27 sec 2.5 TEST3: 3 min, 09 sec !! Machine #2 Boot until prompt: 2.4: 30 sec 2.5: 39.6 sec mkfs.ext3 26560MB partition 2.4: 24.9 sec 2.5 TEST3: 3 min, 27 sec !! I haven`t timed the install process, but it also seems to be slower. > The supplied kernel config is the one we are using for the iso, you have to apply the squasfs patch to the kernel sources in order to use it. But indeed not very useful for a "normal" kernel. Thanks for the clarification. > best regards > Juergen Regards,

2 2

Notes about test3
by Ricardo Oliveira 18 Nov '08

18 Nov '08

Hello, I just wanted to leave some feedback about the test3 iso. First I have noticed that mkfs.ext3 (and not only ext3) takes an abnormal amount of time to make the fs...This was pretty fast on 2.4. The boot from the cd is also somewhat slower. The kernel compile process fails if squashfs is enabled in the config. BTW is there any use for squashfs, is it worth having this enabled in the kernel? Regards,

2 1

Does anyone want to adopt the directfb port?
by Tilman Sauerbeck 08 Nov '08

08 Nov '08

Hi, I'm just going through our open bug reports and I saw that #225 is still open. Clearly I'm not interested in directfb enough, so I won't maintain it in 2.5 anymore. Does anyone want to adopt the port (opt or contrib)? IIRC Victor Martinez was interested in it in February -- are you still interested now Victor? Regards, Tilman [1] http://crux.nu/bugs/index.php?do=details&task_id=225 -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

2 1

CRUX 2.5: usbdisk images
by Jose V Beneyto 08 Nov '08

08 Nov '08

Hi, I uploaded some images for booting 2.5 from usbdisk. http://crux.nu/~sepen/tmp/crux-2.5-test2.usbdisk.img http://crux.nu/~sepen/tmp/crux-2.5-test2.usbdisk.md5 http://crux.nu/~sepen/tmp/crux-2.5-test3.usbdisk.img http://crux.nu/~sepen/tmp/crux-2.5-test3.usbdisk.md5 If you are interested and want to test it, you will need a usb boot capable bios and a usbdisk greater than 260MB. Then use 'dd' to create the installation media on the usb stick: $ sudo dd if=crux-2.5-test3.usbdisk.img og=/dev/XXX (where XXX is your usbdisk device) * you shouldn't use a normal partition with the stick, just use 'sda', 'sdb', etc. instead of 'sda1', ... I made a 'make_usbdisk' script for easily generate these images from the iso images, but I'm still __working on it__. So maybe some stuff like 'net-setup' could not work without arguments. Then all you need is to specify an alternate value for the 'crux_dir' variable ('/cdrom/crux' as default).You can also make a symlink to '/usbdisk' in order to have the '/cdrom' directory necessary for the fake cdrom environment. I'll glad to see your opinions and results. Best regards, Jose V Beneyto

1 0

ANN: CRUX 2.5-test3
by Tilman Sauerbeck 06 Nov '08

06 Nov '08

Hi, we are pleased to announce the third test release of the upcoming CRUX 2.5 release. Please give it a try and report any problems you might find. Thanks, Tilman, for the CRUX team. [1] http://crux.nu/~jue/tmp/crux-2.5-test3.iso http://crux.nu/~jue/tmp/crux-2.5-test3.md5

2 1

add sourceforge to /etc/hosts for 2.5
by Clemens Koller 03 Nov '08

03 Nov '08

Hi there! What about adding 193.1.193.66 download.sourceforge.net download.sf.net dl.sourceforge.net dl.sf.net to /etc/hosts for CRUX-2.5? I don't see any chance to get happy without a line like that and with every new installation, I tap into http://crux.nu/Wiki/Faq?from=Main.Faq#ntoc23 Regards, Clemens

2 2

A case against blackbox
by Johannes Winkelmann 01 Nov '08

01 Nov '08

Hey there, Currently, we're shipping Blackbox in the ISO, which is definitely a good example for a KISS window manager; personally, I've used it exclusively for the past 6+ years. However two issues made me recently reconsider this (I haven't switched yet), and I think the same applies also for shipping it as default WM on the ISO: * Unmaintained upstream: We already patch it to compile with gcc 4.3; patches for this, along with other bugfixes, have been submitted to the sourceforge bugtracker quite some time ago, and it appears there's no one integrating these. * No support for numerous X features Blackbox lacks support for both Xinerama (patch in the sourceforge bugtracker since end of 2005 :-)) and xrandr, thus making dual screen setups more painful than it should be. Due to the lack of upstream maintenance, this is unlikely to change for any new features to come. Given that we want to avoid playing upstream in our ports, and that our secondary focus is supporting recent technologies, I think it's time to discuss whether blackbox is the best choice today. I wouldn't necessarily build a new ISO just for this, but if we are then we might as well do it for 2.5 already. As for alternatives, openbox is high on my list, but has some more dependencies (which are all already on the ISO though), but maybe others can comment on that and suggest their preference; I guess any reasonably lightweight WM in opt that is used by more than just one maintainer (= would stay in opt even if the current maintainer leaves) would qualify. Cheers, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann jw(a)smts.ch

5 5

ANN: CRUX 2.5-test2
by Juergen Daubert 01 Nov '08

01 Nov '08

Hello, we are happy to announce that a test-release of CRUX 2.5 is available now [1]. Please give it a good test and report any problem. Remember, the glibc port does not build locales, see [2] how to generate them. thanks and best regards Juergen, for the CRUX team. [1] http://crux.nu/~jue/tmp/crux-2.5-test2.iso http://crux.nu/~jue/tmp/crux-2.5-test2.md5 [2] http://crux.nu/Main/Handbook2-5#LocaleGeneration -- Juergen Daubert | mailto:jue@jue.li Korb, Germany | http://jue.li/crux

4 9