On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote:
>
> And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a
> specific machine is portable?

Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of
your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from
another machine

Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic

On Ma, 10 iul 12, 21:33:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
> I compile software myself for at least three reasons.
> 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do
> it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do
> translations. Until now I never finished a translation.

Do you mean for Qtractor or in general? As far as I know you don't need
to compile the software if it uses gettext, you just copy the .mo files
where needed.

Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic

On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 23:28 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Ma, 10 iul 12, 21:33:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> >
> > I compile software myself for at least three reasons.
> > 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do
> > it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do
> > translations. Until now I never finished a translation.
>
> Do you mean for Qtractor or in general? As far as I know you don't need
> to compile the software if it uses gettext, you just copy the .mo files
> where needed.

Qt Linguist can't show text for code that isn't already programmed. So
when doing a translation you need to compile, each time new text was
added by the coder. IIRC for Qt Linguist we need to generate some
file(s) during compiling, I guess it's not possible to get the file(s)
without compiling.
I suspect compiling is needed for Qt based software.

- Ralf


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341953018.2288.51.camel@precise

On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 22:43 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 23:28 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Ma, 10 iul 12, 21:33:51, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > >
> > > I compile software myself for at least three reasons.
> > > 1. In the past I often was a tester for e.g. Qtractor and I plan to do
> > > it in the future again. It also is needed, if you wish to do
> > > translations. Until now I never finished a translation.
> >
> > Do you mean for Qtractor or in general? As far as I know you don't need
> > to compile the software if it uses gettext, you just copy the .mo files
> > where needed.
>
> Qt Linguist can't show text for code that isn't already programmed. So
> when doing a translation you need to compile, each time new text was
> added by the coder. IIRC for Qt Linguist we need to generate some
> file(s) during compiling, I guess it's not possible to get the file(s)
> without compiling.
> I suspect compiling is needed for Qt based software.

PS:
I never finished a translation, hopefully I'll finish a translation this
or next year :S.

##########
You need to tell that there is a new translation:

$
cat /mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor/qtractor-0.5.3.15-de_translation-1.patch
Index: Makefile.in
================================================== =================
--- Makefile.in (revision 3006)
+++ Makefile.in (working copy)
@@ -263,10 +263,12 @@
src/qtractor.qrc

translations_sources =
- src/translations/qtractor_cs.ts
+ src/translations/qtractor_cs.ts
+ src/translations/qtractor_de.ts

translations_targets =
- src/translations/qtractor_cs.qm
+ src/translations/qtractor_cs.qm
+ src/translations/qtractor_de.qm


export datarootdir = @datarootdir@
Index: src/src.pro
================================================== =================
--- src/src.pro (revision 3006)
+++ src/src.pro (working copy)
@@ -272,7 +272,8 @@
qtractor.qrc

TRANSLATIONS +=
- translations/qtractor_cs.ts
+ translations/qtractor_cs.ts
+ translations/qtractor_de.ts

unix {

Index: TRANSLATORS
================================================== =================
--- TRANSLATORS (revision 3006)
+++ TRANSLATORS (working copy)
@@ -1,2 +1,5 @@
Czech (cs)
Pavel Fric <pavelfric@seznam.cz>
+
+German (de)
+ Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net>






##########
The files are *.ts files

$ ls /mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_*
/mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_de.ts.bak-00001 /mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_de.ts.bak-empty
/mnt/archlinux/usr/src/qtractor_de.ts.bak-00002


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341953535.2288.55.camel@precise

On 10/07/12 04:22 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote:

And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a
specific machine is portable?

Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of
your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from
another machine

Kind regards,
Andrei
Or if you need to change your hardware. Or if you want to use your drive
to boot another machine - such as for testing or demonstration purposes.


Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a
non-bootable machine from a live CD.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4FFCB8A5.2030408@rogers.com">http://lists.debian.org/4FFCB8A5.2030408@rogers.com

On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote:
> >
> > why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are
> > compiling kernel on debian.
> > what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and
> > have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of
> > compiling in this time window.
>
> The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work
> on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece
> of hardware that can be installed in a PC.
>
> I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer.
> This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint.
>
> It's all a matter of what you want.

Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers,
since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we
perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need
different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should work
on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't remove too
much.

2 Cents,
Ralf


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1341965162.2288.107.camel@precise

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 02:06:02 +0200
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:

> On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 08:54 -0700, Mike McClain wrote:
> > Howdy,
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 05:03:12PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote:
> > >
> > > why people do compiling. i have heard many time that people are
> > > compiling kernel on debian.
> > > what is the reason for this? i am using debian for almost 1.5 year and
> > > have been using it on different platform in CLI mode. but no need of
> > > compiling in this time window.
> >
> > The kernel provided when you install Linux, Debian included, has to work
> > on nearly every system out there so it includes drivers for nearly piece
> > of hardware that can be installed in a PC.
> >
> > I always compile a kernel with only the hardware I have in my computer.
> > This gives me a smaller memory footprint and a smaller disk footprint.
> >
> > It's all a matter of what you want.
>
> Those smaller footprints usually aren't needed for modern computers,
> since we've usually got more than enough disc space and RAM. OTOH we
> perhaps change some hardware from time to time and then we need
> different modules. Perhaps a visitor has some hardware, that should work
> on our computers. It's a dangerous balancing act. I wouldn't remove too
> much.

Then I'll reboot into a distro stock kernel, or rebuild. Don't forget,
that on the modern hardware everyone is talking about, rebuilding a
kernel is a fairly swift process.

Celejar


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120710224748.9f15edd2.celejar@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/20120710224748.9f15edd2.celejar@gmail.com

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:22:46 +0300
Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a
> > specific machine is portable?
>
> Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of
> your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from
> another machine

Not quite sure I get you - if my hypothetical router (running x86 HW,
not like my actual routers that run OpenWRT on arm, and that don't
have lots of extra MB to spare) needs a new kernel, I can just send over
a distro stock one; why should my work machine kernel need to be
appropriate for my router?

Celejar


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120710225002.e75ed475.celejar@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/20120710225002.e75ed475.celejar@gmail.com

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400
Gary Dale <garydale@rogers.com> wrote:

> On 10/07/12 04:22 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> > On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote:
> >> And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a
> >> specific machine is portable?
> > Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of
> > your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from
> > another machine
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Andrei
> Or if you need to change your hardware. Or if you want to use your drive
> to boot another machine - such as for testing or demonstration purposes.

Well, you were the one suggesting that one only needs a custom kernel
for special, unusual cases. I daresay that for most users of linux,
removing a HDD to boot another machine for testing or demonstration
purposes is rather a special case ...

> Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a
> non-bootable machine from a live CD.

True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap
HDDs.

Celejar


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120710225230.301454b7.celejar@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/20120710225230.301454b7.celejar@gmail.com

On 10/07/12 10:52 PM, Celejar wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 19:20:05 -0400
Gary Dale<garydale@rogers.com> wrote:


On 10/07/12 04:22 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:

On Ma, 10 iul 12, 15:08:52, Celejar wrote:

And why do I care whether the kernel I compile locally for a
specific machine is portable?

Imagine a situation where due to whatever reason the kernel image of
your router machine gets corrupted, then you can just copy the file from
another machine

Kind regards,
Andrei

Or if you need to change your hardware. Or if you want to use your drive
to boot another machine - such as for testing or demonstration purposes.

Well, you were the one suggesting that one only needs a custom kernel
for special, unusual cases. I daresay that for most users of linux,
removing a HDD to boot another machine for testing or demonstration
purposes is rather a special case ...
Not really. Linux isn't Windows where you need to install onto each
machine. Booting from a temporarily attached HD proves the concept then
a quick dd gets you up and running. Some people do this from a USB or
e-SATA drive, with full read-write capability that is often lacking from
USB stick / live CDs.


Of course, the more normal problem is that you're trying to recover from
a hardware failure or upgrade and your custom kernel no longer boots.





Having a portable kernel is a lot simpler than trying to rescue a
non-bootable machine from a live CD.

True - but then I can just grab a distro stock kernel before I swap
HDDs.

You still need to go through the aggravation of booting from a live CD
then setting up a chroot environment just to get around the fact that
you compiled a non-portable kernel. You wouldn't have to do any of that
if you had just stuck with the stock kernel.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4FFCF141.4010307@rogers.com">http://lists.debian.org/4FFCF141.4010307@rogers.com