Masking Gnome 3

eccerr0r · Posted: Wed Dec 18, 2013 2:18 pm Post subject:

Ah yes it looks like there's a bunch more holdouts than I thought.

Mate should be the solution, alas, it's not in portage yet (and I don't want to deal with overlays just yet). Also it seems some of these masks people have been generating are dependent on overlays so I'm not quite sure if there are some dependencies there.

I generated my own list with the 3.8 hack as a base. Now I'm sort of stuck with just libsoup and libgdata being blocked.

Ugh... dependency nightmare! Plus I have multiple machines that I need to repeat the same exercise with... ugh. Or they should be upgraded to systemd+gnome3.8 ...
_________________
Intel Core i7 2700K/Radeon R7 250/24GB DDR3/256GB SSD
What am I supposed watching?

krinn · Watchman Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470

Can you edit your first message with updates so others doesn't need to dig it too much to find proper way to mask it?
We could then ask a sticky and send anyone with that problem to this thread.

krinn · Watchman Joined: 02 May 2003 Posts: 7470

Here's my portage.mask
I don't have gtk+ in mine, but it works for me.
No more udev mask as i have switch to eudev
edit: remove/adapt toolchain mask for your own usage.
edit: i'm not sure if my portage.mask is good for that thread, mine is masking gnome3, and not just 3.8

voidzero · Bodhisattva Joined: 21 Jul 2002 Posts: 265 Location: Grnn

As much as I love Gentoo, I too HATE the Gnome3 bs and really think Gentoo went into the wrong direction.

Gentoo, we'll keep being friends, I'll keep you installed, but you really should stop this Gnome3 madness.

I AM DISAPPOINT!
_________________
Diplomacy is the art of letting the other party have things your way.
-- Daniele Vare

voidzero · Bodhisattva Joined: 21 Jul 2002 Posts: 265 Location: Grnn

Guys, is there an updated list of recommended packages one has to mask? I'm having some dependency issues. Maybe I can try removing and then reinstalling.

edit The list supplied above is working for me, but here is one package I needed to add to packages.mask:

bdx · n00b Joined: 04 Jan 2006 Posts: 65

I am also attempting to mask off gnome 3 but must have missed something and now the system->shutdown menu is missing and pressing the power button on the laptop does nothing -- I think it used to be the same as system->shutdown. Is there any way to get this back ?

depontius · Advocate Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 3522

It may take consolekit and/or policykit to get those buttons to work. Many people don't like the *kit programs, and they may be in your packages.mask.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth

tatterdemalian · n00b Joined: 21 Jul 2011 Posts: 46

I'm masking GNOME 3 on my mother's old computer, because its old GeForce4 Ti card can't handle it, and Mom never plays anything requiring higher graphics capabilities than PySol, anyway.

Unfortunately, this is causing portage to complain bitterly whenever I try to do a --deep update.

depontius · Advocate Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 3522

I run a straight desktop profile, and have some gnome applications. You should be able to "pop up" a level on the profile to desktop without the gnome, and mask your way out of this. But desktop/gnome will require 3.8 and will require systemd, even though they've got desktop/gnome as well as desktop/gnome/systemd - the former really doesn't work, any more.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth

Anon-E-moose · Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 1:20 pm Post subject:

I'm simply amazed at the number of threads that keep popping up where some people think that
one can update gdm or a component of gnome or go to systemd without pulling in practically all of the latest gnome.

For some packages it's possible, but does typically require lots of masking to get rid of blocks.

It's not really clear to many that one either goes whole hog or not at all in the gnome world.
It's similar in many respects to when Kde went to 3 and then 4, of course they didn't have the added brouhaha of systemd.
_________________
UM780, 6.1 zen kernel, gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland

Navar · Guru Joined: 20 Aug 2012 Posts: 355 Location: usa

I had a reply wrote up for this earlier and killed it. Playing devil's advocate that I was being too harsh and not neutral enough to the overall situation here (and more importantly, elsewhere). So, let's try this again. :twisted:

@tatterdemalian,

depontius essentially re-iterated what I was going to initially say. On a more detailed level, look at the profile make.defaults and package.use files within
/usr/portage/profiles/targets/desktop and
/usr/portage/profiles/targets/desktop/gnome

That may add a bit more clarity. You don't need either of those settings to have a gnome2/3 desktop and, yes, the later is currently set with additionally new gnome3 specific requirements. And, yes, they changed a 'testing' version to being keyworded stable while retaining slot conflicts with Gnome2. The point, essentially, was definitely to force most users to upgrade on updating. The rest are ignored and told they are unsupported (whatever that really means). Keep in mind the mindset with bug reports on anything Gnome2 specific essentially fell into perpetual wontfix/ignored due to Gnome2 already being viewed as depreciated via upstream's mindset. The triage effort into Gnome2 in the last 2-3 years seemed weak at best with most effort from that subset of devs being on Gnome3. But since I do not see any of those particular devs involved in the actual codebase with freedesktop.org, my expectations of patch fixes versus regressions and so on were more or less null and void. What remained more disconcerting was this essentially wind up toy event coming over time in non-existant communications between gnome herd devs and the userbase. But first, as a testbed, let's see how excited the ants scurry about with (udev)systemd!

Also keep in mind that systemd 'conveniently' became a requirement due to a logind requirement added within Gnome 3.8. From a patch on upstream mailing list showing this change it looks like it could be removed, but it's probably just more intertwined in 3.10+. Naturally because of this, power management was also tied into systemd in a 'may as well' fashion. The developers responsible for all of that have some 'interesting' here's-what-we-think-of-our-users-and-3rd-party-developers comments in the link I give later.

In all fairness, none of this really has much to do with the Gentoo developers in the grand scheme of things. Other than decisions of how they opted to, if at all, fight with following upstream entirely while trying to maintain the abandoned Gnome2 set, or just go with the flow. If I were to put my dev hat on versus a fretting user that I didn't wish to placate, there's the simple argument that we've had at least 3 years to 'prepare and reflect'. There also seems to be somewhat of a pervasive hivemind to 'encourage' moving to systemd adoption as the default. Most distros have been either getting their collective asses kicked around with this or just trying to go the path of least resistance (which in this case, still involved plenty of work). You can leave Gentoo and be no less worse for wear because these radical changes imposed won't just go away, industry wide. The closest things would be a long term security patch support binary distro with either strong remaining Gnome2 or the MATE(gtk2)/Cinnamon(gtk3) forks. Or stepping back to 19eightyfrickingfive when this functionality already existed for a desktop, use KDE (which still seems confused on direction), or roll your own limited mix of windowmanager Bob+flavorings+CLI. If gtk2 was adopted/maintained by XFCE/MATE developers with a healthy 3rd party developer base supporting them fully and monetary backing (hi Google) to actually compete with RedHat's resources, I wouldn't be quite as concerned. But none of that is the case. So you have a developer base who has been fractioned off since old Motif days into QT vs GTK camps around these two desktops and their always changing ideals. Because of that and that alone, some quality software with years of serious development effort get held hostage. And I guarantee it's going to get worse.

The best thing that could have happened is the claimed merit based adoption. That the folks monetized via redhat renamed their new entity for a desktop, forking away from Gnome2 or (as they've done anyway) a complete re-write from scratch. They'll create their own widget toolkit and frameworks to use instead of forcing longstanding ones to be depreciated by them. They'll produce a stablized and quality API design that everyone can confidently understand with no concerns about stable releases underlying smartly changing implementation details. Which in turn, 3rd party developers will greatly appreciate and get behind with their own efforts leveraging said API while not expecting such to break every other month. In fact, they're excited, since this new API and way is the best thing to Linux since prior sliced bread days. They're such heroes to the community that they will provide flawless sophisticated conversion utilities to automatically migrate GTK and QT calls in 3rd party code to their new API. And, they'll foolhardily take on changing the entire init system even more 'progressively' into a closed and monolithic system than Canonical that anything and everything will be forced to ultimately depend upon because it's for the best. It'll be presented in Fedora as the wonder upon wonders and immediately merged into the Enterprise. But it'll be so great and they'll prove everyone else who came before them for decades and in the decades to come that their new setup is the best, the way and the light... And then we'll all switch, due to the quality unbiased books, multitude of new related professional certifications, knowledge base, serious technical articles in professional journals fawning over the godlike design decisions and proven undestructable yet so productively user friendly systems worldwide showing just how right they were! The bazaar will finally have come home to the cathedral. Righto... :roll:

I've been dreading this change since reading about it initially back at 3.0. I had hopes at least some of the backlash they'd receive from radically changing and unstable API would get upstream to eventually see the light. But this is about money, product branding and industry control, treating newer users and existing 3rd party developers like sheep, not merit. Watched any of their videoed speeches regarding newer aspects, particularly security? I have. It's scary. Their desktop platform, widget toolkits, etc. aren't worth a damned thing without the 3rd party software leveraging it and its userbase they're manipulating. Yes I'm talking about Redmo...hat. For all their over-talk decisions and literal enforcement of all towards 'simplicity' and completely dumbed down on the front end of things (creating and maintaining that brand for their cloud oriented userbase), they're making the back end of systems the giant ugly monster hiding behind door number 3... Luddites? Conspiracy? Etc.? Nah, too simplistic. This is just plain and simple corporate agenda, but at least when Google is doing it they don't claim an apple is an orange.

The original developers have long lost control of gtk, gnome, etc. into the hands of the corporate collective and being morphed into completely different targets. Before I go off sounding any more cynical about the new kool-aid, here's a great link to sum much of the current attitudes upstream:

http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/gnome-et-al-rotting-in-threes/
_________________
(I don't speak for/represent my current employer)

Anon-E-moose · Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 6:14 pm Post subject:

Interesting link, Navar.

Tony0945 · Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2014 11:58 pm Post subject:

Navar, you are right on. I fear the era of free software, produced by professionals for the love of doing it right, is ending. Instewad we will get shlock Microsoft clones like Ubuntu.

Anon-E-moose · Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 11:22 am Post subject:

If you want to keep gnome-2* then I would suggest that you copy all the ebuilds into your local portage now.
That way you can still keep using it even if it gets removed (almost a certainty) from portage.

Yes, it would be a pain, and there would be no fixes, but if it's working now, then it will continue to work.

eccerr0r · Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:02 pm Post subject:

Currently the ideal situation is that we can keep the ebuilds plus be able to upgrade unrelated stuff... this second part is tough with so many blocks with the proposed masks...

I've also noticed with the gnome masks, portage is a whole lot slower calculating... ouch...
_________________
Intel Core i7 2700K/Radeon R7 250/24GB DDR3/256GB SSD
What am I supposed watching?

Anon-E-moose · Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 4:34 pm Post subject:

666threesixes666 · Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 8:53 pm Post subject:

my gnome 3.0.0 package masking is much cleaner than the posts above... i propose we merge this thread and sticky..... (my threads located in this link)

https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-980866-highlight-.html

Anon-E-moose · Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 11:23 pm Post subject:

Depending on what one is trying to pull in and what is enabled on one's system this is a good running start for continuing to run or switching to gnome 2

figueroa · Posted: Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:25 am Post subject:

This thread was a lot of help to me. I believe I have successfully masked Gnome 3 and upgraded to Gnome 2.32.1.

This is my /etc/portage/package.mask entries:

voidzero · Bodhisattva Joined: 21 Jul 2002 Posts: 265 Location: Grnn

Let's see how far my bug report will make it:

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=498804

Title:
"Completely remove GNOME from Portage"

I deliberately did not state GNOME3 because I don't want to limit the bug to version 3. Perhaps the bug entry can be used to discuss the scope.
_________________
Diplomacy is the art of letting the other party have things your way.
-- Daniele Vare

voidzero · Bodhisattva Joined: 21 Jul 2002 Posts: 265 Location: Grnn

If you guys think this is is in any way something you could support, please make it known in this bug report. It was just closed as invalid (gee, who would have thunk).

I'll gladly admit i'm a joker, but in this case it was not intended as a bogus report.

I genuinely want GNOME removed, or at least this has to be debated.

Or do you guys disagree?
_________________
Diplomacy is the art of letting the other party have things your way.
-- Daniele Vare

TomWij · Retired Dev Joined: 04 Jul 2012 Posts: 1553

A removal of a ton of packages needs solid and sound reasoning to carry weight; as its removal would be announced to all developers, just like any other package removal. Without such reasoning, there are sufficient reasons to keep it in the Portage tree.

As a side note; please note that GNOME 2 and/or GNOME 3.6 will eventually be removed from the Portage tree thus the masks only work for a limited amount of time, I suggest that you look into MATE, Unity or an alternative solution instead to avoid wasting time.

Krellan · n00b Joined: 27 Aug 2010 Posts: 31

It angers and saddens me, but I feel I have no choice.

I think my system has passed the point of no return. I tried to stay with GNOME 2.32 as long as possible. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to do a clean "emerge world" in some time. There's just too much pressure to move forward.

I tried several of the lists of masked packages in this thread, they were helpful. Unfortunately, I still get hit by strange dependencies that seem to be unresolvable, probably because the older version of the program I needed has already been deleted from the Gentoo Portage tree when doing "emerge sync". It's unfortunate that this is being done. I wish the developers would have continued to give us the choice of GNOME 2 or GNOME 3, perhaps with USE flags "gnome2" or "gnome3" to allow the choice to be made.

So, wish me luck. I'm going to remove my carefully curated package.keywords, package.mask, etc. files and just start over, taking the Gentoo defaults. Hopefully I will have a stable system again, even if it means having to accept the lobotomy that GNOME 3 gives to the desktop experience.

depontius · Advocate Joined: 05 May 2004 Posts: 3522

You might consider using "Mate" instead. Currently it's in an overlay, but I thought I heard that it may be getting in portage mainline. It's basically a fork to keep the gnome-2 interface.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth

Krellan · n00b Joined: 27 Aug 2010 Posts: 31

Thanks. I will look into Mate.

It's better than the alternative: reinstalling my system from scratch. I don't think it's saveable. I played around with various things in package.mask, package.keywords, and so on, and even after removing all these files, emerge can't find a solution to bring my system back to "standard".

I keep getting trapped in slot conflicts. libpng seems to be the worst offender, but there are many others. It wants to keep at least three versions of libpng on my system, sigh.