xorg is not in the repos!

synthead · 2007-09-05 19:46:58

pacman -S xorg

It doesn't exist!

lucke · 2007-09-05 20:06:31

You have to pull xorg-server and whatever other xorg-related packages you need. xorg was just a virtual package pulling all the others after transition to modular system, methinks.

synthead · 2007-09-05 20:12:47

I used to be able to pacman -S xorg and just run startx, what do I need to download to get to this point?

Cerebral · 2007-09-05 20:16:55

The xorg dummy package used to pull in this stuff:

depends=(xorg-server xorg-xkb-utils xorg-xauth xorg-server-utils
     xorg-xinit xf86-video-vesa xf86-input-mouse xf86-input-keyboard)

So you'll probably want xorg-server, xorg-xauth, xorg-xkb-utils, xorg-server-utils, and xorg-init at least. You'll likely want the keyboard and moust drivers too.

dolby · 2007-09-05 20:19:00

why is that? i cant find any related post anywhere. it was convinient pulling xorg like that.

Last edited by dolby (2007-09-05 20:20:07)

kth5 · 2007-09-05 20:20:43

synthead wrote:

pacman -S xorg
It doesn't exist!

I removed the package since even if it used to pull everything you need to get xorg up and running, it either pulled too much - drivers, fonts etc - or not enough and it required manual interaction still.

The way I install xorg is this:

# pacman -Sy xorg-server xorg-xinit xf86-input-{mouse,keyboard} xf86-video-<mycard> xorg-fonts-<mydpi>
# X -configure
# $EDITOR xorg.conf.new
# mv xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf

Last edited by kth5 (2007-09-05 20:21:44)

shining · 2007-09-05 20:20:50

dolby wrote:

why is that? i cant find any related post anywhere. it was convinient pulling xorg like that.

I am also curious

oli · 2007-09-05 20:33:10

>I removed the package since even if it used to pull everything

I understand this, but an common info would be nice too.

dolby · 2007-09-05 20:39:15

kth5 wrote:

The way I install xorg is this:

# pacman -Sy xorg-server xorg-xinit xf86-input-{mouse,keyboard} xf86-video-<mycard> xorg-fonts-<mydpi>

afai can tell your way doesnt download only xorg-kbd-utils and xf86-video-vesa and you get the drivers for your card and the extra font packege(s) just like u always could. i dont see the point in this. i would definately vote having the same dummy package back if its only a matter of the many extra packages and its irrelevant to functionality etc.

Last edited by dolby (2007-09-05 20:41:16)

synthead · 2007-09-05 20:45:01

I don't care if it did this or that - it worked. After an arch install, I could pacman -S xorg fluxbox to then startx and bam - 25% of what I want to do on a box is done already. If people want to get certain parts of xorg, they still can. With xorg, it just worked. Isn't that the point of Arch?

Lone_Wolf · 2007-09-05 21:39:07

Wiki edited to reflect this change.

mrblister · 2007-09-05 21:41:50

kth5 wrote:

synthead wrote:
pacman -S xorg
It doesn't exist!
I removed the package since even if it used to pull everything you need to get xorg up and running, it either pulled too much - drivers, fonts etc - or not enough and it required manual interaction still.
The way I install xorg is this:
# pacman -Sy xorg-server xorg-xinit xf86-input-{mouse,keyboard} xf86-video-<mycard> xorg-fonts-<mydpi>
# X -configure
# $EDITOR xorg.conf.new
# mv xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf

Gotta tell you this is a -REALLY- crappy way of handling the situation. I'm sitting here working on yet another arch box and now you are going to make me jump through 7 hoops in order to do what I previously had done by jumping through 1 hoop? AND!! you are doing it with no announcement nor discussion?

I dont have time for this kind thing. I dont have time to run down and figure out what dev has what pet peeve on which day and how that is going to affect what currently does or has worked. If you want to keep Arch running in the light it has been these kinds of things are the absolute wrong way of going about it.

fwojciec · 2007-09-05 21:59:24

mrblister wrote:

Gotta tell you this is a -REALLY- crappy way of handling the situation. I'm sitting here working on yet another arch box and now you are going to make me jump through 7 hoops in order to do what I previously had done by jumping through 1 hoop? AND!! you are doing it with no announcement nor discussion?
I dont have time for this kind thing. I dont have time to run down and figure out what dev has what pet peeve on which day and how that is going to affect what currently does or has worked. If you want to keep Arch running in the light it has been these kinds of things are the absolute wrong way of going about it.

I think you're being overly dramatic, maybe...

What has changed is that instead of writing "sudo pacman -Sy xorg" you now have to specify which xorg packages are to be installed explicitly, ie. "pacman -Sy xorg-server xorg-xinit xf86-input-{mouse,keyboard} xf86-video-<mycard> xorg-fonts-<mydpi>". Everything else, configuration etc., is still the same. I don't know what "7 hoops" you're talking about...

To me this change makes sense, it makes you think a bit about what you want and need installed instead of giving you a one-size-fits-all solution that doesn't fit any system particularly well.

fwojciec · 2007-09-05 22:01:39

synthead wrote:

(...) it just worked. Isn't that the point of Arch?

No!
Ubuntu: "just works"
Arch: KISS
Very different things.

nesl247 · 2007-09-05 22:20:06

Keeping something simple usually means it just works. Because having to go through a lot of steps to get to something is the opposite of simple.

mrblister · 2007-09-05 22:22:50

fwojciec wrote:

mrblister wrote:
Gotta tell you this is a -REALLY- crappy way of handling the situation. I'm sitting here working on yet another arch box and now you are going to make me jump through 7 hoops in order to do what I previously had done by jumping through 1 hoop? AND!! you are doing it with no announcement nor discussion?
I dont have time for this kind thing. I dont have time to run down and figure out what dev has what pet peeve on which day and how that is going to affect what currently does or has worked. If you want to keep Arch running in the light it has been these kinds of things are the absolute wrong way of going about it.
I think you're being overly dramatic, maybe...
What has changed is that instead of writing "sudo pacman -Sy xorg" you now have to specify which xorg packages are to be installed explicitly, ie. "pacman -Sy xorg-server xorg-xinit xf86-input-{mouse,keyboard} xf86-video-<mycard> xorg-fonts-<mydpi>". Everything else, configuration etc., is still the same. I don't know what "7 hoops" you're talking about...
To me this change makes sense, it makes you think a bit about what you want and need installed instead of giving you a one-size-fits-all solution that doesn't fit any system particularly well.

I'm not being overly dramatic, and I am distinctly aware of what exactly has happened. My issue is with the fact that a virtual package that made things quite a bit simpler in terms of setup was removed due to the discretion of a dev with no input or notice. As well, the stated reason for the removal was something that could have been done already by those who cared or needed to do so. This change in no way adheres to the KISS methodology as you so cleverly insinuated. In fact it goes completely contrary to the whole approach.

I'm mostly concerned with the fact that something that has been standard practice for some time is just switched like this. Creating my own package to pull the needed files is trivial, thats not the point though. I'll be curious to see if this sort of thing will begin to happen more and more often or if this sort of thing is a fluke. Situations like this are why I jumped ship from gentoo and came to Arch in the first place.

fwojciec · 2007-09-05 22:35:43

Very respectfully: I think both of you are confusing "simple" with "easy". Simple refers to the level of complexity, and the level of (system) complexity is - without question - increased whenever a dummy package is introduced into the system. It just adds another layer to things, and makes everything that much less transparent. Easy just refers to the amount of effort that is required to accomplish something, and in that sense the previous solution was indeed easier.

I've had problems with X fonts in the past, for example, and for a long time I couldn't figure out what was wrong because I've lived with a false sense of security that "xorg" package took care of installing all the components of xorg I needed... Or consider all the people who write PKGBUILDs for AUR and include "xorg" as a dependency.

Last edited by fwojciec (2007-09-05 22:39:18)

nesl247 · 2007-09-05 22:45:58

Ah, how about use functionality in pacman, you know, that thing called groups? Just create an xorg group for the stuff that used to be a meta package.

iphitus · 2007-09-05 22:56:13

I think that pulling it was a tad overkill. If people wanted to specify individual drivers themselves, that's fine, but it's always been convenient to simply pacman -S xorg. Keeping the metapackage doesn't hurt, but withdrawing it is inconvenient and makes it drastically less obvious as to how to install Xorg -- I shouldnt have to read the wiki.

James

CavalierBob · 2007-09-05 23:13:52

+1 iphitus!

synthead · 2007-09-05 23:17:49

iphitus wrote:

I think that pulling it was a tad overkill. If people wanted to specify individual drivers themselves, that's fine, but it's always been convenient to simply pacman -S xorg. Keeping the metapackage doesn't hurt, but withdrawing it is inconvenient and makes it drastically less obvious as to how to install Xorg -- I shouldnt have to read the wiki.
James

My words exactly!

shining · 2007-09-05 23:19:08

nesl247 wrote:

Ah, how about use functionality in pacman, you know, that thing called groups? Just create an xorg group for the stuff that used to be a meta package.

I would like to know what others think about that, it might be a good idea.

fwojciec · 2007-09-05 23:58:31

shining wrote:

nesl247 wrote:
Ah, how about use functionality in pacman, you know, that thing called groups? Just create an xorg group for the stuff that used to be a meta package.
I would like to know what others think about that, it might be a good idea.

I like it. In addition a lot could be made more user-friendly by supplying .install file with xorg-server package, for example, that would print out little message during installation explaining what the deal with xorg is and what packages need to be installed explicitly to enable particular functionalities.

But then, on the other hand, dummy xorg package is not something I have a passionate vendeta against or anything

oli · 2007-09-06 00:27:30

fwojciec wrote:

Very respectfully: I think both of you are confusing "simple" with "easy". Simple refers to the level of complexity, and the level of (system) complexity is - without question - increased whenever a dummy package is introduced into the system. It just adds another layer to things, and makes everything that much less transparent. Easy just refers to the amount of effort that is required to accomplish something, and in that sense the previous solution was indeed easier.
I've had problems with X fonts in the past, for example, and for a long time I couldn't figure out what was wrong because I've lived with a false sense of security that "xorg" package took care of installing all the components of xorg I needed... Or consider all the people who write PKGBUILDs for AUR and include "xorg" as a dependency.

If you want an insight in the nature of KISS, have a look at *BSD. LFS would be somewhat KISS too, but you know it's a tightrope walk between sense and nonsense.

toofishes · 2007-09-06 01:41:57

kth5 wrote:

synthead wrote:
pacman -S xorg
It doesn't exist!
I removed the package since even if it used to pull everything you need to get xorg up and running, it either pulled too much - drivers, fonts etc - or not enough and it required manual interaction still.
The way I install xorg is this:
# pacman -Sy xorg-server xorg-xinit xf86-input-{mouse,keyboard} xf86-video-<mycard> xorg-fonts-<mydpi>
# X -configure
# $EDITOR xorg.conf.new
# mv xorg.conf.new /etc/X11/xorg.conf

Sorry kth5 but I'm going to disagree with you on this one as well. People weren't forced to use it before, but it sure made it a hell of a lot easier to just get things running.

Some of us don't install xorg once a day, so when we do want to install it, we want to be able to do it without having to look all of this stuff up.

Arch Linux

#1 2007-09-05 19:46:58

xorg is not in the repos!

#2 2007-09-05 20:06:31

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#3 2007-09-05 20:12:47

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#4 2007-09-05 20:16:55

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#5 2007-09-05 20:19:00

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#6 2007-09-05 20:20:43

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#7 2007-09-05 20:20:50

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#8 2007-09-05 20:33:10

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#9 2007-09-05 20:39:15

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#10 2007-09-05 20:45:01

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#11 2007-09-05 21:39:07

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#12 2007-09-05 21:41:50

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#13 2007-09-05 21:59:24

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#14 2007-09-05 22:01:39

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#15 2007-09-05 22:20:06

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#16 2007-09-05 22:22:50

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#17 2007-09-05 22:35:43

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#18 2007-09-05 22:45:58

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#19 2007-09-05 22:56:13

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#20 2007-09-05 23:13:52

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#21 2007-09-05 23:17:49

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#22 2007-09-05 23:19:08

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#23 2007-09-05 23:58:31

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#24 2007-09-06 00:27:30

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

#25 2007-09-06 01:41:57

Re: xorg is not in the repos!

Board footer