HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

neocrust · 2011-06-07 12:41:01

This manual for clear install system only. Use it at your own risk. There is no guarantee of future without conflicts between the dependencies. If you want global upgrade (pacman -Syu) after Gnome 2 installation, make sure you masked all Gnome 2 packages in /etc/pacman.conf.

Task: Gnome 2 (from Arch Rollbak Machine) with up-to-date system packages

Step 1. Install a core system.
Install new core system with netinstall cd or with core cd. If you use core cd, make sure you update your system with "pacman -Syu" after installation.

Step 2. Xorg, drivers, sound
Usual Xorg, drivers and sound installation with wiki installation guide =]

Step 3. Gnome 2
Replace appropriate lines in /etc/pacman.conf with:

[core]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/04/29/core/os/i686

[extra]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/04/29/extra/os/i686

[community]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/04/29/community/os/i686

Update and install gnome 2:

pacman -Sy gnome

or with gnome-extra meta-package:

pacman -Sy gnome gnome-extra

Step 4. Conflicts and fix for them
Gstreamer0.10-plugins require neon, but newest neon not can be installed (krb5 and heimdal conflict).
Some packages (pidgin, for example) require cyrus-sasl-plugins, but newest cyrus-sasl-plugins not can be installed (krb5 and heimdal conflict).
We can install old neon and old cyrus-sasl-plugins for fix this problem (see 5 step also):
Replace appropriate lines in /etc/pacman.conf with:

[extra]
#Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/05/05/extra/os/i686

Update and install neon and cyrus-sasl-plugins:

pacman -Sy neon cyrus-sasl-plugins

Well, now we can install gstreamer0.10-plugins and pidgin from up-to-date repositories. See step 5.

Step 5. Final.
Rollback commented lines in pacman.conf (come back to up-to-date repositories):

[core]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
#Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/04/29/core/os/i686

[extra]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
#Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/04/29/extra/os/i686

[community]
Include = /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist
#Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2011/05/05/community/os/i686

Update:

pacman -Syy

and install other packages which you need. For me:

pacman -S gstreamer0.10-plugins firefox pidgin

Warning! There is no guarantee of future conflicts between the dependencies. If you want global upgrade (pacman -Syu) after Gnome 2 installation, make sure you masked all Gnome 2 packages in /etc/pacman.conf.

I hope this helps someone.

P.S.: Sorry for my bad english =]

ewaller · 2011-06-07 15:47:40

Your English is better that that of many native speakers. Have you considered adding this to the Wiki? From what I see, you would do well in both English and (I presume) Russian.

As an aside, my daughter is a competitive gymnast and her coaches are Russian. It is humorous to hear Russian exclamations from her

karol · 2011-06-07 15:52:16

ewaller wrote:

Your English is better that that of many native speakers. Have you considered adding this to the Wiki? From what I see, you would do well in both English and (I presume) Russian.

Do you think it should be kept on a user page or as a regular article?

Also, I would stress make sure you update your system with "pacman -Syu" after installation a bit more so it doesn't get overlooked.

wonder · 2011-06-07 15:52:22

i really don't want that to our wiki. it gives the impression we are supporting gnome 2 but we don't.

ngoonee · 2011-06-07 15:58:25

I concur with wonder, gnome 3 has its problems, but those wanting a gnome2 system should simply not update Arch. The method here, while 'working' in a sense, is fundamentally broken and should not be in the wiki.

@neocrust, not meant to put you down at all, I'm sure some will find this useful. Hopefully those same 'some' will know its their own fault when their system eventually stops working

ewaller · 2011-06-07 16:25:56

Yeah, you guys are correct. I missed that it was Gnome 2. Regardless, I still think neocrust could help with the Wiki (Translations and such)

ILoveJapaneseGirls · 2011-06-07 21:34:33

I don't agree with you guys, I think this should be in the wiki.

Which software version someone decides to keep in his system is his decision and/or a matter of personal preference, and if the person prefers the stable version instead of the unstable one, we have to respect.

However the reason I think this should be in the wiki is because GNOME 3 is very unstable and many users (including me) would rather have the whole system updated except for GNOME 2.

I understand that GNOME 3 introduces many new features, but GNOME 2 is still compatible with most applications and will still be "usable" for a long time, at least until GNOME 3 becomes much more stable.

I, for example, have Windows XP for tasks that cannot be done in Linux. I'll never change to Vista or 7 because virtually all software run on XP, even the most recent ones. And we're talking about a system from 10 years ago. And it still works fine (okay, it's Windows, you know what I mean by "works fine" lol, but Vista or 7 don't suck less either).

So you should consider including that in the wiki. It's a very good manual!

Any comments?

Thank you so far!

karol · 2011-06-07 21:47:55

ILoveJapaneseGirls wrote:

I, for example, have Windows XP for tasks that cannot be done in Linux. I'll never change to Vista or 7 because virtually all software run on XP, even the most recent ones. And we're talking about a system from 10 years ago. And it still works fine (okay, it's Windows, you know what I mean by "works fine" lol, but Vista or 7 don't suck less either).
So you should consider including that in the wiki. It's a very good manual!

Arch is a rolling-release distro and we support only the current packages, not a decade old system, like Microsoft does. Each way has its up- and downsides.

wonder · 2011-06-07 21:58:09

ILoveJapaneseGirls wrote:

However the reason I think this should be in the wiki is because GNOME 3 is very unstable and many users (including me) would rather have the whole system updated except for GNOME 2.

instead of running away from the present maybe work a bit for the future by reporting your stability issues on our tracker and upstream. gnome devs are happy to fix them all but, as you well know, they can't really test every possibilities and they rely on communities like ours.

ngoonee · 2011-06-07 23:23:49

ILoveJapaneseGirls wrote:

I don't agree with you guys, I think this should be in the wiki.
Which software version someone decides to keep in his system is his decision and/or a matter of personal preference, and if the person prefers the stable version instead of the unstable one, we have to respect.
However the reason I think this should be in the wiki is because GNOME 3 is very unstable and many users (including me) would rather have the whole system updated except for GNOME 2.
I understand that GNOME 3 introduces many new features, but GNOME 2 is still compatible with most applications and will still be "usable" for a long time, at least until GNOME 3 becomes much more stable.
I, for example, have Windows XP for tasks that cannot be done in Linux. I'll never change to Vista or 7 because virtually all software run on XP, even the most recent ones. And we're talking about a system from 10 years ago. And it still works fine (okay, it's Windows, you know what I mean by "works fine" lol, but Vista or 7 don't suck less either).
So you should consider including that in the wiki. It's a very good manual!
Any comments?
Thank you so far!

You do not seem to understand, gnome2 is compiled against certain system libraries, when those update gnome2 will not even start. Its not a matter of 'stable' or 'unstable', once upstream dumps software its only a matter of time till it is unusable unless maintenance is done to keep the software compatible against the latest versions of all the libraries involved.

Your windows XP example is the same as what others have said, its analogous to just running gnome2 AND NOT UPDATING your Arch system. Windows XP isn't receiving updates either.

ILoveJapaneseGirls · 2011-06-07 23:29:30

wonder wrote:

instead of running away from the present maybe work a bit for the future by reporting your stability issues on our tracker and upstream.

If prefering an older version of a software instead of a new one is running away from the present, then pacman shouldn't allow Downgrading at first, and consequently there shouldn't be an article in the wiki teaching how to do it.

Sometimes people just prefer the old software until the new one improves or satisfy their needs, especially considering a Desktop Environment that is an essential part of an Operating System. When a drastic change occurs, these people may want to wait a little time to change to the new software so they don't have to learn how to do everything again just to do simple tasks they did everyday.

As far as I know, downgrading from GNOME 3 to GNOME 2 can be very complicated, so people should have this information in case they don't like the new version.

Also, if many newer software requires GNOME 3 to run, sooner or later these people will realize they'll have to change to GNOME 3 instead of sticking to the old one, but as I said, I still think GNOME 2 will be "usable" and compatible with many new software for a long time.

Thanks!

wonder · 2011-06-07 23:55:59

basically what are you explaining to me is that you don't have any stability issues but instead you prefer old versions. in this case arch is not for you and you prefer a distribution like debian

neocrust · 2011-06-08 05:24:50

ewaller wrote:

Your English is better that that of many native speakers. Have you considered adding this to the Wiki? From what I see, you would do well in both English and (I presume) Russian.

Thanks!
I'm not 100% sure that it should be in Wiki... Because this way to get Gnome 2 is so dangerous for beginners.

But if admins allow to me for add this in wiki, I will glad add it

Last edited by neocrust (2011-06-08 06:21:26)

neocrust · 2011-06-08 05:29:32

wonder wrote:

i really don't want that to our wiki. it gives the impression we are supporting gnome 2 but we don't.

Yep, but totally fans of Gnome 2 (as me) would be glad to see this article. I think so.

But it your solution =]

neocrust · 2011-06-08 05:41:54

Well...
I understand that Arch not support Gnome 2 in this moment, but it really to get working Gnome 2 in Archlinux (my current system is an real example for working of this way =] ).

So, I add it to wiki or not? (of course with warnings for new users)

Last edited by neocrust (2011-06-08 06:05:55)

neocrust · 2011-06-08 06:08:08

ewaller wrote:

Regardless, I still think neocrust could help with the Wiki (Translations and such)

I m glad to help =]

jeff story · 2011-06-08 07:57:39

wonder wrote:

i really don't want that to our wiki. it gives the impression we are supporting gnome 2

ngoonee wrote:

I concur with wonder

ewaller wrote:

Yeah, you guys are correct. I missed that it was Gnome 2

wonder wrote:

basically what are you explaining to me is that you don't have any stability issues but instead you prefer old versions. in this case arch is not for you and you prefer a distribution like debian

With all due respect to the Arch big dogs, I respectfully, completely disagree with your stance regarding Gnome 3.

Wouldn't the above quotes be a perfect example of group think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

Why are all the Gnome 2 users expected to just roll over and comply to Gnome's force feeding desktop users to test the Shell that was obviously designed for a system without mouse intergration, ie tablets, etc?

I come to the force feed testing conclusion based on the following facts:

1) Gnome switched libraries and or dependencies that made it nearly if not completely impossible to run Gnome 2 and 3 DE on the same root system.
2) Gnome did not implement the fall back mode features that would have made Gnome 3 a usable replacement for Gnome2.
3) Gnome knowingly released a seriously broken for the desktop with version 3.
4) Gnome must have focused all development resources on Gnome shell designed for the tablet (big new potential market) because of all the missing features in "fallback" aka "desktop" mode.
5) Gnome appears to have turned their back on regular desktop users, at least those who prefer to use a mouse.

If the desktop users debug the Shell, it will be closer to prime time during the next predicted big computer marketing thing, the tablet.

Isn't Linux supposed to be all about community, choice, contribution, etc? Does this include Arch?
If someone has figured out a way to avoid the Gnome 3 train wreck, and retain his version of the best of an Arch/Gnome2 system, more power to him...
If that someone has taken the time to document his accomplishments, has he not contributed by sharing that info?

Out of concern for this thread getting moved, lost or deleted in the future, and to have neocrust's info available to the most people ................

I'd like to suggest an alternative to what has been discussed here so far. How about a link at the bottom of the Gnome wiki page with a title like, Gnome 2 on Arch "UNOFFICIAL"?

If that's agreeable to the Arch big dogs, I'd gladly donate an account on my website http://www.jeffstory.org/wordpress/ if neocrust would be interested in maintaining and updating it.

Oh, and regarding the last quote by wonder, would it have been more appropriate to suggest an alternative DE rather than basically saying, go away from Arch? I really prefer Arch, so I chose to switch to XFCE rather than distros... If I had more Linux smarts, Id have likely taken the same path as neocrust.

Last edited by jeff story (2011-06-08 17:22:16)

wonder · 2011-06-08 09:22:51

i don't want it because i have to put with bugs not you. They don't think, they are just doing copy/paste then report bugs when something is broken and i have to debug the problem to see from where it comes, why is the bug present and it takes time.

i can give so many examples on how to wreck everything and report as a bug, simply because is so simple to wreck it.

ewaller · 2011-06-08 14:57:50

jeff story wrote:

Wouldn't the above quotes be a perfect example of group think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

No.

We are representatives of Arch. As such, on these forums, we try and put our own opinions aside and provide a uniform position. We don't do this to minimize conflict, we do it because we want to be cohesive. There are side-channels where there is, er, lively discussion. You might be interested in the irc channels or in the mailing lists.

JGC · 2011-06-08 17:05:11

As for GNOME 2.x in the wiki: it would be fine, but only if it was an unofficial repository that works and is maintained. Suggesting people to install outdated packages from a wayback machine and not updating their systems will do more harm than good. If you want to keep GNOME alive on Arch, you'll have to maintain it. Looking at KDE3, there's several repositories available with packages that do work with updated archlinux systems.

bwat47 · 2011-06-08 19:05:44

JGC wrote:

As for GNOME 2.x in the wiki: it would be fine, but only if it was an unofficial repository that works and is maintained. Suggesting people to install outdated packages from a wayback machine and not updating their systems will do more harm than good. If you want to keep GNOME alive on Arch, you'll have to maintain it. Looking at KDE3, there's several repositories available with packages that do work with updated archlinux systems.

Yeah this method is very hacky, and is guaranteed to stop working eventually if you update your system.

Anyone that really liked gnome 2 should consider switching to XFCE instead of trying to use EOL software.

ngoonee · 2011-06-08 22:54:22

JGC wrote:

As for GNOME 2.x in the wiki: it would be fine, but only if it was an unofficial repository that works and is maintained. Suggesting people to install outdated packages from a wayback machine and not updating their systems will do more harm than good. If you want to keep GNOME alive on Arch, you'll have to maintain it. Looking at KDE3, there's several repositories available with packages that do work with updated archlinux systems.

This would be the best long-term solution. However maintaining it would be akin to maintaining Gnome2 itself as a fork, since as libraries update this repo would have to be rebuilt and the bugs squashed. This will not be done within Arch because that's not how out-of-date and 'dead' software is handled.

@jeff story - you're barking up the wrong tree. Arch follows upstream, gnome3 replacing gnome2 is an upstream decision. Bug reports should be placed there.

neocrust · 2011-06-09 10:02:07

JGC wrote:

As for GNOME 2.x in the wiki: it would be fine, but only if it was an unofficial repository that works and is maintained.

I totally agree with you.

And I will be glad to help with something...

ngoonee · 2011-06-09 13:53:07

neocrust wrote:

JGC wrote:
As for GNOME 2.x in the wiki: it would be fine, but only if it was an unofficial repository that works and is maintained.
I totally agree with you.
And I will be glad to help with something...

I suggest starting a new forum topic to gather interested users. Also post something up in the mailing list. You'd need to find someone to host the repo, and a pool of people (or one person with a lot of free time) to handle the inevitable patching required.

Once the repo is somewhat functioning you can put up a link to it on the wiki. But please remember a big fat THIS REPO IS UNSUPPORTED, IF YOU HAVE PROBLEMS PLEASE ASK US IN '***' where '***' is your own forum thread or something along those lines. That's how a community distro works, if the community wants something it'll work on it.

neocrust · 2011-06-09 15:24:45

ngoonee wrote:

I suggest starting a new forum topic to gather interested users. Also post something up in the mailing list. You'd need to find someone to host the repo, and a pool of people (or one person with a lot of free time) to handle the inevitable patching required.
Once the repo is somewhat functioning you can put up a link to it on the wiki. But please remember a big fat THIS REPO IS UNSUPPORTED, IF YOU HAVE PROBLEMS PLEASE ASK US IN '***' where '***' is your own forum thread or something along those lines. That's how a community distro works, if the community wants something it'll work on it.

Ok, no problem =]

P.S.: First, for compatibility between Gnome 2 and current Archlinux, we must create evolution-data-server 2.32 package with krb5 support (evolution-data-server is one package from all Gnome 2 which have a conflict with krb5). I'll try to do it.

Last edited by neocrust (2011-06-09 16:52:51)

Arch Linux

#1 2011-06-07 12:41:01

HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#2 2011-06-07 15:47:40

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#3 2011-06-07 15:52:16

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#4 2011-06-07 15:52:22

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#5 2011-06-07 15:58:25

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#6 2011-06-07 16:25:56

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#7 2011-06-07 21:34:33

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#8 2011-06-07 21:47:55

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#9 2011-06-07 21:58:09

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#10 2011-06-07 23:23:49

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#11 2011-06-07 23:29:30

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#12 2011-06-07 23:55:59

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#13 2011-06-08 05:24:50

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#14 2011-06-08 05:29:32

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#15 2011-06-08 05:41:54

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#16 2011-06-08 06:08:08

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#17 2011-06-08 07:57:39

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#18 2011-06-08 09:22:51

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#19 2011-06-08 14:57:50

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#20 2011-06-08 17:05:11

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#21 2011-06-08 19:05:44

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#22 2011-06-08 22:54:22

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#23 2011-06-09 10:02:07

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#24 2011-06-09 13:53:07

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

#25 2011-06-09 15:24:45

Re: HOWTO: Gnome 2 with up-to-date core system

Board footer