Hello,

What does it means when the ~amd64 is not one of the keywords used to
mask the package?

The problem I have is that I would like to install amarok 2 but I
cannot unmask it by accepting ~amd64. It is safe to unmask it using
~x86 even though my system is amd64?

Thanks in advance.

Best,
Damian.

On Friday 23 January 2009 11:11:18 Damian wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What does it means when the ~amd64 is not one of the keywords used to
> mask the package?
>
> The problem I have is that I would like to install amarok 2 but I
> cannot unmask it by accepting ~amd64. It is safe to unmask it using
> ~x86 even though my system is amd64?

The ebuild has this:

$ grep KEYWORDS amarok-2.0.1.1.ebuild
KEYWORDS="~x86"

So it's not even tested on amd64. The answer is in 'man portage':


Note:
In addition to the normal values from ACCEPT_KEYWORDS package.key-
words supports three special tokens:

* package is visible if it is stable on any architecture
~* package is visible if it is in testing on any architecture
** package is always visible (KEYWORDS are ignored completely)



--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday 23 January 2009 11:11:18 Damian wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> What does it means when the ~amd64 is not one of the keywords used to
>> mask the package?
>>
>> The problem I have is that I would like to install amarok 2 but I
>> cannot unmask it by accepting ~amd64. It is safe to unmask it using
>> ~x86 even though my system is amd64?
>
> The ebuild has this:
>
> $ grep KEYWORDS amarok-2.0.1.1.ebuild
> KEYWORDS="~x86"
>
> So it's not even tested on amd64. The answer is in 'man portage':
Thanks Alan.

Best,
Damian.
>
>
> Note:
> In addition to the normal values from ACCEPT_KEYWORDS package.key-
> words supports three special tokens:
>
> * package is visible if it is stable on any architecture
> ~* package is visible if it is in testing on any architecture
> ** package is always visible (KEYWORDS are ignored completely)
>
>
>
> --
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
>
>

On Friday 23 January 2009 12:06:43 Damian wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > On Friday 23 January 2009 11:11:18 Damian wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> What does it means when the ~amd64 is not one of the keywords used to
> >> mask the package?
> >>
> >> The problem I have is that I would like to install amarok 2 but I
> >> cannot unmask it by accepting ~amd64. It is safe to unmask it using
> >> ~x86 even though my system is amd64?
> >
> > The ebuild has this:
> >
> > $ grep KEYWORDS amarok-2.0.1.1.ebuild
> > KEYWORDS="~x86"
> >
> > So it's not even tested on amd64. The answer is in 'man portage':
>
> Thanks Alan.

I almost forgot - trying to emerge amarok2.0.1.1 is almost guaranteed to fail
due to the amarok devs have no clue as to how mysql is built, plus other
errors:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=238487
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250870

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

> I almost forgot - trying to emerge amarok2.0.1.1 is almost guaranteed to fail
> due to the amarok devs have no clue as to how mysql is built, plus other
> errors:
Indeed. I think it's time for me to drop one more kde app.


> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=238487
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250870
>
> --
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
>
>

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Damian <damian.only@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> What does it means when the ~amd64 is not one of the keywords used to
> mask the package?
>
> The problem I have is that I would like to install amarok 2 but I
> cannot unmask it by accepting ~amd64. It is safe to unmask it using
> ~x86 even though my system is amd64?

Before trying to emerge Amarok 2, create (or edit) the file
/etc/portage/env/dev-db/mysql and add these lines:

CFLAGS="-march=core2 -O2 -ggdb -pipe -DPIC -fPIC"
CXXFLAGS="-O2 -pipe -DPIC -fPIC"

(change the march & other options to match what you normally use for
CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS), the important part here is -DPIC -fPIC

then re-emerge mysql if you've already got it installed. After that
Amarok should build successfully. If you don't do that, you will waste
your time.

On Tuesday 27 January 2009 18:35:07 Damian wrote:
> > I almost forgot - trying to emerge amarok2.0.1.1 is almost guaranteed to
> > fail due to the amarok devs have no clue as to how mysql is built, plus
> > other errors:
>
> Indeed. I think it's time for me to drop one more kde app.
>
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=238487
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250870

I'm sorely tempted to do the same. amarok-2.0.1.1 does eventually compile if
you:

build mysql or mysql-community with USE="embedded -minimal"
then
build amarok

But it just feels ... clunky. The big content panel in the middle is awkward:

There's no way I can find to tell amarok which applet you want to go where,
with multiple panes in use the animation effect to switch from one to the
other is non-intuitive. Eventually by zooming the whole thing out you can see
it's 4 panes arranged 2x2 and the animation simulates moving from one to
another. But it doesn't *tell* you it's laid out like that so the random
motion looks weird. The "last played" display switches back and forth between
a "name with cover art" format and a long black oval just like the applet
selector. Um, which is it supposed to be?

And many many other quirks, too many to mention. As a player, it plays OK -
sound does come out of the speakers. But players are commodity apps these
days. Dump one, use another, easy peasy.

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

On Tuesday 27 January 2009 21:40:29 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 January 2009 18:35:07 Damian wrote:
> > > I almost forgot - trying to emerge amarok2.0.1.1 is almost guaranteed
> > > to fail due to the amarok devs have no clue as to how mysql is built,
> > > plus other errors:
> >
> > Indeed. I think it's time for me to drop one more kde app.
> >
> > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=238487
> > > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=250870
>
> I'm sorely tempted to do the same. amarok-2.0.1.1 does eventually compile
> if you:
>
> build mysql or mysql-community with USE="embedded -minimal"
> then
> build amarok
>
> But it just feels ... clunky. The big content panel in the middle is
> awkward:
>
> There's no way I can find to tell amarok which applet you want to go where,
> with multiple panes in use the animation effect to switch from one to the
> other is non-intuitive. Eventually by zooming the whole thing out you can
> see it's 4 panes arranged 2x2 and the animation simulates moving from one
> to another. But it doesn't *tell* you it's laid out like that so the random
> motion looks weird. The "last played" display switches back and forth
> between a "name with cover art" format and a long black oval just like the
> applet selector. Um, which is it supposed to be?
>
> And many many other quirks, too many to mention. As a player, it plays OK -
> sound does come out of the speakers. But players are commodity apps these
> days. Dump one, use another, easy peasy.

I have (aka anli) claimed here :-) -
http://amarok.kde.org/forum/index.php/topic,15777.0.html

On Tuesday 27 January 2009 20:52:03 Andrew Gaydenko wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 January 2009 21:40:29 Alan McKinnon wrote:

> > And many many other quirks, too many to mention. As a player, it plays OK
> > - sound does come out of the speakers. But players are commodity apps
> > these days. Dump one, use another, easy peasy.
>
> I have (aka anli) claimed here :-) -
> http://amarok.kde.org/forum/index.php/topic,15777.0.html

Now that's *much* better. I could even use that :-)

Gotta patch?

--
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

On Tuesday 27 January 2009 22:51:34 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 January 2009 20:52:03 Andrew Gaydenko wrote:
> > On Tuesday 27 January 2009 21:40:29 Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > > And many many other quirks, too many to mention. As a player, it plays
> > > OK - sound does come out of the speakers. But players are commodity
> > > apps these days. Dump one, use another, easy peasy.
> >
> > I have (aka anli) claimed here :-) -
> > http://amarok.kde.org/forum/index.php/topic,15777.0.html
>
> Now that's *much* better. I could even use that :-)
>
> Gotta patch?

Currently I have switched to MPD (which is lirc-izable and has plenty of
clients). Will look at A2 evolution...