Active Topics
Bad_Habit |
2011-05-26
, 19:30
|
|
Posts: 48 |
Thanked: 32 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Russia, Moscow
|
#51
|
Originally Posted by Tigerite
try using fapt-get instead of fapman
|
|
2011-05-26
, 19:49
|
|
Posts: 2,225 |
Thanked: 3,822 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Florida
|
#52
|
Well, for whatever reason after all the reflashes and all the other stuff that I've done since reporting that the last version still said it depended on busybox. Right now both apt-cache depends and FApMan report that busybox power only depends on libc6. I use HAM ONLY when necessary. That thing is so painfully slow that I don't touch it unless there's necessity (actual or for the ethical purpose of debugging; but this isn't important enough of debugging).
So that was a temporary bug on my end. *Shrug*
So that was a temporary bug on my end. *Shrug*
| The Following User Says Thank You to Mentalist Traceur For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2011-05-26
, 20:12
|
|
Posts: 284 |
Thanked: 320 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Peterborough, UK
|
#53
|
Originally Posted by Bad_Habit
Actually I downloaded the deb directly and used dpkg -i (my preferred method), but it then complained about the conflict. I could uninstall busybox-symlinks-procps, however I'm a bit worried it might break dependencies.
try using fapt-get instead of fapman
|
|
2011-05-26
, 20:37
|
|
Posts: 48 |
Thanked: 32 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Russia, Moscow
|
#54
|
Originally Posted by Tigerite
dpkg doesn't handle dependencies, apt does
Actually I downloaded the deb directly and used dpkg -i (my preferred method), but it then complained about the conflict. I could uninstall busybox-symlinks-procps, however I'm a bit worried it might break dependencies.
|
|
2011-05-26
, 20:49
|
|
Posts: 284 |
Thanked: 320 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Peterborough, UK
|
#55
|
I mean that busybox itself might complain should I remove/purge busybox-symlinks-procps. Besides, apt is really just a wrapper, as dpkg can override dependencies at install time with its ignore-depends and force-depends options. The main worry I have, though, is that busybox-symlinks-procps provides some pretty important functions (kill, pkill, free, top, watch, uptime, pgrep and ps itself) and so removing it probably isn't wise. I might just go with force-conflicts and hope for the best.
Unfortunately Fapman can't find procps and I, like Mentalist, steer well clear of HAM unless absolutely necessary.
Update: force-conflicts didn't work either. It allowed the package to be installed, but then its files were automatically replaced by those in the busybox-symlinks-procps package. Adding force-overwrite also had no effect.
Last edited by Tigerite; 2011-05-26 at 20:54.
Unfortunately Fapman can't find procps and I, like Mentalist, steer well clear of HAM unless absolutely necessary.
Update: force-conflicts didn't work either. It allowed the package to be installed, but then its files were automatically replaced by those in the busybox-symlinks-procps package. Adding force-overwrite also had no effect.
Last edited by Tigerite; 2011-05-26 at 20:54.
|
|
2011-05-26
, 21:15
|
|
Posts: 48 |
Thanked: 32 times |
Joined on Dec 2010
@ Russia, Moscow
|
#56
|
Originally Posted by Tigerite
fapman can find procps in extras-devel (or -testing), you should just tell it to show all packages, not only user categories
I mean that busybox itself might complain should I remove/purge busybox-symlinks-procps. Besides, apt is really just a wrapper, as dpkg can override dependencies at install time with its ignore-depends and force-depends options. The main worry I have, though, is that busybox-symlinks-procps provides some pretty important functions (kill, pkill, free, top, watch, uptime, pgrep and ps itself) and so removing it probably isn't wise. I might just go with force-conflicts and hope for the best.
Unfortunately Fapman can't find procps and I, like Mentalist, steer well clear of HAM unless absolutely necessary.
Update: force-conflicts didn't work either. It allowed the package to be installed, but then its files were automatically replaced by those in the busybox-symlinks-procps package. Adding force-overwrite also had no effect.
don't worry about missing commands, my system is absolutely ok
|
|
2011-05-26
, 21:18
|
|
Posts: 268 |
Thanked: 1,053 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ The Netherlands
|
#57
|
Originally Posted by Mentalist Traceur
I'm glad to hear this, thanks for reporting back.
So that was a temporary bug on my end. *Shrug*
Originally Posted by Tigerite
Nokia's mp-fremantle-generic-pr depends on busybox-symlinks-procps, so the odds are that it will get broken. If you don't mind that, installing procps is perfectly safe.
I could uninstall busybox-symlinks-procps, however I'm a bit worried it might break dependencies.
Originally Posted by Bad_Habit
Well, the purpose of BusyBox is to provide many common UNIX utilities (like top) into a single, lightweight executable. Including fully featured binaries would therefore defeat its purpose; it falls beyond the scope of the project.
I like the output of "top" command from procps, you could include the same into busybox
Please take further discussion about procps outside of this thread; its only relevance to busybox-power is that it provides a temporary 'workaround' for ps. Discussion about procps, or the installation of it, doesn't really belong here. Thanks
|
|
2011-05-26
, 21:32
|
|
Posts: 284 |
Thanked: 320 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Peterborough, UK
|
#58
|
Originally Posted by iDont
Sorry, this will be my last post about procps on this thread and probably full stop - you're absolutely right, I got the warning about mp-fremantle-203-pr and could only continue with -B. I didn't like that option though (having broken dependencies is a real pain, as apt-get and dpkg complain every time) so instead I used dpkg-deb -x and -e on busybox-symlinks-procps, modified the control file and then rebuilt with dpkg-deb -b (see attached). It's still necessary to use --force-overwrite when installing the procps package, but it works and no broken dependencies or conflicts
Nokia's mp-fremantle-generic-pr depends on busybox-symlinks-procps, so the odds are that it will get broken. If you don't mind that, installing procps is perfectly safe.
...
Please take further discussion about procps outside of this thread; its only relevance to busybox-power is that it provides a temporary 'workaround' for ps. Discussion about procps, or the installation of it, doesn't really belong here. Thanks
|
|
2011-05-28
, 09:26
|
|
Posts: 268 |
Thanked: 1,053 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ The Netherlands
|
#60
|
Originally Posted by droll
Thanks for reporting.
btw, showkeys fails with some error when i have a bluetooth keyboard attached.
Showkey only works on true terminal input. It even fails on my desktop terminal emulator unless I switch to a new tty. This happens with all showkey parameters, except for -a. However, showkey -a seems to be failing on Maemo too
This seems to be a limitation of BusyBox's showkey implementation. I've been digging in BusyBox' mailinglist and came across a patch that allowed "showkey -a" to work on any stdin. This patch has been commited to BusyBox' source tree and therefore will be in the yet-to-be-released BusyBox 1.19.
However, we want it now, right? I've applied the patch to my local busybox-power (1.18.4) tree. Showkey -a now seems to be working on Maemo. The -s and -k parameters still won't work, as Maemo always runs an X server. I changed the default option from -k to -a for convenience's sake
Next busybox-power (power5) will include the patch described above.
| The Following User Says Thank You to iDont For This Useful Post: | ||