No dbus and compiling FF

freemedia2018 · 2019-11-20 21:58:26

HevyDevy wrote:

Hopefully this wont affect my machines, i dont use elogind or consolekit, ive been using devuan with no dbus and it runs great for what i need.

hevy i would love a little tutorial for dbus-free devuan.

of all the concerns ive had about devuan, backpedaling from the initial concept is my largest concern. anything that mitigates that concern is welcome-- i would like dbus to be optional (i dont know if that was ever part of the devuan plan, but fsmithred and i have talked about making dbus optional-- for ourselves-- more than once.)

mmaglis · 2019-11-21 15:05:36

freemedia2018 wrote:

i would love a little tutorial for dbus-free devuan.

These may be of help:

https://devuan.org/os/documentation/dev … thout-dbus

https://devuan.org/os/documentation/dev … e-software

I followed them and I am dbus free, happily using either console, Openbox, EXWM or Stumpwm on my aged laptop.

freemedia2018 · 2019-11-21 16:57:04

mmaglis wrote:

These may be of help:

thanks very much!

HevyDevy · 2019-11-22 16:02:00

freemedia2018 wrote:

HevyDevy wrote:
Hopefully this wont affect my machines, i dont use elogind or consolekit, ive been using devuan with no dbus and it runs great for what i need.
hevy i would love a little tutorial for dbus-free devuan.
of all the concerns ive had about devuan, backpedaling from the initial concept is my largest concern. anything that mitigates that concern is welcome-- i would like dbus to be optional (i dont know if that was ever part of the devuan plan, but fsmithred and i have talked about making dbus optional-- for ourselves-- more than once.)

I am also "semi" dbus free on voidlinux. Im not sure how well this works over the long term but so far so good.

voids xbps package management has a flag set to ignore packages.

man xbps.d

ignorepkg=pkgname
Declares a ignored package. If a package depends on an ignored
package the dependency is always satisfied, without installing the
ignored package.

example,

sudo nano /etc/xbps.d/pin_dbus.conf

ignorepkg=dbus

query dbus yields...

$ sudo xbps-query -l | grep dbus
ii dbus-glib-0.110_1                       GLib bindings for D-Bus
ii dbus-libs-1.12.16_1                     Message bus system - shared libraries
ii dbus-x11-1.12.16_1                      Message bus system - X11 support

Ive a pretty simple setup using dwm as window manager. Latest firefox pulls in dbus-glibs, no getting around that.

pstree

$ pstree
runit─┬─compton───{compton}
      ├─dwmstart.sh─┬─conky───5*[{conky}]
      │             └─dwmstart.sh
      ├─runsvdir─┬─runsv───login───startx───xinit─┬─Xorg
      │          │                                └─sh───startdwm.sh───dwm─┬─firefox─┬─RDD Process───4*[{RDD Process}]
      │          │                                                         │         ├─Web Content───32*[{Web Content}]
      │          │                                                         │         ├─Web Content───47*[{Web Content}]
      │          │                                                         │         ├─Web Content───30*[{Web Content}]
      │          │                                                         │         ├─Web Content───22*[{Web Content}]
      │          │                                                         │         ├─WebExtensions───29*[{WebExtensions+
      │          │                                                         │         └─69*[{firefox}]
      │          │                                                         └─xterm───bash───pstree
      │          ├─7*[runsv───agetty]
      │          ├─runsv───udevd
      │          ├─runsv───uuidd
      │          ├─runsv───sshd
      │          ├─runsv───dhcpcd
      │          ├─runsv───acpid
      │          ├─runsv───haveged
      │          ├─runsv───wpa_supplicant
      │          ├─runsv───hddtemp
      │          └─runsv───pause
      ├─volumeicon
      └─xscreensaver

runit is such a nice init.

Last edited by HevyDevy (2019-11-22 16:09:05)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2019-11-23 14:18:04

HevyDevy wrote:

Latest firefox pulls in dbus-glibs, no getting around that.

Dylan Araps (the KISS Linux developer) has a patch that allows the latest FF to run without dbus:

https://github.com/kisslinux/repo/blob/ … dbus.patch

HevyDevy · 2019-11-24 05:57:36

^ Looks like you would need to build firefox from source to be able to patch it, would that be right?

tlathm · 2019-11-24 16:19:51

HevyDevy wrote:

^ Looks like you would need to build firefox from source to be able to patch it, would that be right?

It certainly appears that way, and that's a really massive compile (requiring rust for some time now) if you've never attempted it.

My company uses Devuan for headless servers, and our needs are very lean so none of this applies. On my own machines I'm currently using Gentoo, and switched from FF to palemoon quite some time ago for more reasons than I can count, including the compile requirements. I can even compile palemoon on very old hardware where I literally wouldn't live long enough to compile FF. Also note that palemoon already has a configuration option to omit dbus.

Tom

HevyDevy · 2019-11-25 14:23:39

tlathm wrote:

HevyDevy wrote:
^ Looks like you would need to build firefox from source to be able to patch it, would that be right?
It certainly appears that way, and that's a really massive compile (requiring rust for some time now) if you've never attempted it.
My company uses Devuan for headless servers, and our needs are very lean so none of this applies. On my own machines I'm currently using Gentoo, and switched from FF to palemoon quite some time ago for more reasons than I can count, including the compile requirements. I can even compile palemoon on very old hardware where I literally wouldn't live long enough to compile FF. Also note that palemoon already has a configuration option to omit dbus.
Tom

Interesting, what was the compile time for palemoon on that old hardware? Im pretty sure my old hardware would probably break if using the cpu at 100 % for more than 30 minutes, but ive never tried it so cant comment.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2019-11-25 18:17:01

HevyDevy wrote:

Looks like you would need to build firefox from source to be able to patch it, would that be right?

Yes, that's right. For Debian-derived systems it is possible to use the OBS to make it for you, accounts are free.

mckaygerhard · 2019-11-25 22:42:02

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

HevyDevy wrote:
Looks like you would need to build firefox from source to be able to patch it, would that be right?
Yes, that's right. For Debian-derived systems it is possible to use the OBS to make it for you, accounts are free.

what's the problem? OBS works fine for build FF and/or palemoon.. i have my own packages.. for ascii of course .. but not without dbus and for puseshit i'm using apulse

HevyDevy · 2019-11-26 13:41:03

mckaygerhard wrote:

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:
HevyDevy wrote:
Looks like you would need to build firefox from source to be able to patch it, would that be right?
Yes, that's right. For Debian-derived systems it is possible to use the OBS to make it for you, accounts are free.
what's the problem? OBS works fine for build FF and/or palemoon.. i have my own packages.. for ascii of course .. but not without dbus and for puseshit i'm using apulse

Ive never heard of OBS until it was mentioned just now. Not going to sign up for it though, if i build something ill do it locally.

mckaygerhard · 2019-11-26 14:14:46

HevyDevy wrote:

mckaygerhard wrote:
what's the problem? OBS works fine for build FF and/or palemoon.. i have my own packages.. for ascii of course .. but not without dbus and for puseshit i'm using apulse
Ive never heard of OBS until it was mentioned just now. Not going to sign up for it though, if i build something ill do it locally.

without offending you that it's bit stupid.. maybe you can build your package locally just at final stage.. and some other must use OBS to don't waste own resources. compiling FF or chromium browsers need huge amount of resources.. that OBS provides easyle and agnostic environment for right dependences (where you can see if all are meet or fails for some one)

HevyDevy · 2019-11-26 14:32:44

mckaygerhard wrote:

HevyDevy wrote:
mckaygerhard wrote:
what's the problem? OBS works fine for build FF and/or palemoon.. i have my own packages.. for ascii of course .. but not without dbus and for puseshit i'm using apulse
Ive never heard of OBS until it was mentioned just now. Not going to sign up for it though, if i build something ill do it locally.
without offending you that it's bit stupid.. maybe you can build your package locally just at final stage.. and some other must use OBS to don't waste own resources. compiling FF or chromium browsers need huge amount of resources.. that OBS provides easyle and agnostic environment for right dependences (where you can see if all are meet or fails for some one)

You dont get it, im not going to build Firefox or Palemoon from source, i was just asking questions.

freemedia2018 · 2019-11-26 23:56:03

mckaygerhard wrote:

OBS provides easyle and agnostic environment for right dependences (where you can see if all are meet or fails for some one)

if i were going to compile ff at all, part of the reason would be limited trust in opensuse infrastructure, so i dont think compiling locally is "stupid" at all.

however, im aware that devuan has (or at least had) a build cluster. i would trust that over one controlled by opensuse. after all, they control it-- not opensuse. and if they screw up, theyre the ones accountable-- not opensuse.

mckaygerhard · 2019-11-27 00:47:15

freemedia2018 wrote:

mckaygerhard wrote:
OBS provides easyle and agnostic environment for right dependences (where you can see if all are meet or fails for some one)
if i were going to compile ff at all, part of the reason would be limited trust in opensuse infrastructure, so i dont think compiling locally is "stupid" at all.

well i'm talking about that not all the people has YOUR/needed resources.. last time i compiled chromium it takes all the night so a good solution it's that obs service..

however, im aware that devuan has (or at least had) a build cluster. i would trust that over one controlled by opensuse. after all, they control it-- not opensuse. and if they screw up, theyre the ones accountable-- not opensuse.

yeah, of course are best a good environment... but not all the people meet all the requeriments or have enought knowledge/time .. obs are for any novice as expert at same equals

i'm not fan of obs neither opensuse rmp related distro.. but i'm talking about simple and quick access.. not a complete signed gpg and those complicated things.. just for those thant only need the compilation and distribution in some place..

anticapitalista · 2019-11-27 11:26:52

2 people refusing to use capital letters in one thread...

Last edited by anticapitalista (2019-11-27 11:27:52)

yeti · 2019-11-27 12:15:50

anticapitalista wrote:

2 people refusing to use capital letters in one thread...

Was that a capital "2" in your sentence?

Ok, and back to serious ... dear mods ... please chop this case discussion off and beam it into the offtopic section.

aTdHvAaNnKcSe!

HevyDevy · 2019-11-27 13:42:44

mmaglis wrote:

freemedia2018 wrote:
i would love a little tutorial for dbus-free devuan.
These may be of help:
https://devuan.org/os/documentation/dev … thout-dbus
https://devuan.org/os/documentation/dev … e-software
I followed them and I am dbus free, happily using either console, Openbox, EXWM or Stumpwm on my aged laptop.

Dbus free devuan was mentioned by mmaglis in those threads quoted. Just saying as i didnt bother answering freemedia in regards to to this. There is also fsmithreds thread for refracta nodbus https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=2158

Ive no inclination to build FF from source, much the same as i couldn't be bothered maintain my own kernel, if i did i would run something like Crux or Gentoo. Devuan, Debian do a decent job packaging up the kernel and then some web browsers even if having some deps on dbus libraries.

Last edited by HevyDevy (2019-11-27 13:46:08)

tlathm · 2019-11-27 18:29:14

HevyDevy wrote:

Interesting, what was the compile time for palemoon on that old hardware? Im pretty sure my old hardware would probably break if using the cpu at 100 % for more than 30 minutes, but ive never tried it so cant comment.

I was just looking and it doesn't appear I kept track, and can't recall. However seeing as version 28.7.2 is available I just kicked off an update (running with nice), and will post back. To clarify, this is an old Dell 8250 with a 2.53GHz P4...pretty ancient.

I can tell you that it's nothing compared to Libreoffice, which I build from source via Gentoo (as rarely as I can get away with). That takes like a day and a half!

Tom

freemedia2018 · 2019-11-27 20:19:24

HevyDevy wrote:

Dbus free devuan was mentioned by mmaglis in those threads quoted. Just saying as i didnt bother answering freemedia in regards to to this. There is also fsmithreds thread for refracta nodbus https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=2158

yeah, thanks to everybody for their replies, no worries hevy.

bgstack15 · 2019-11-28 01:33:29

I saw the KISS developer's announcement about patching Firefox to build without a dbus dependency. I think that's pretty cool. I do use stock Firefox on Devuan and Fedora, but I do compile Palemoon and Waterfox myself. I actually use the OBS that is referenced above, because then I don't have to do all the heavy lifting at home.

tlathm · 2019-11-28 11:21:41

tlathm wrote:

I was just looking and it doesn't appear I kept track, and can't recall. However seeing as version 28.7.2 is available I just kicked off an update (running with nice), and will post back. To clarify, this is an old Dell 8250 with a 2.53GHz P4...pretty ancient.

Compiling Palemoon 28.7.2 with gcc 8.3.0 (using nice) took me almost exactly 12 hours:

time nice emerge -auv palemoon
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild     U ~] www-client/palemoon-28.7.2::palemoon [28.5.0::palemoon] USE="devtools gtk2 jemalloc official-branding optimize -dbus -debug -gnome (-gtk3) -necko-wifi -pulseaudio -threads -valgrind" CPU_FLAGS_X86="sse sse2" 0 KiB
....
real	722m4.230s
user	550m32.601s
sys	33m4.531s

Also note that I only have 2 GB of RAM which is a big factor as well. No possible way could I compile FF I'd imagine, even if it didn't require rust (the rust source alone is like 275 MB....ouch).

Tom

HevyDevy · 2019-11-28 11:48:38

tlathm wrote:

tlathm wrote:
I was just looking and it doesn't appear I kept track, and can't recall. However seeing as version 28.7.2 is available I just kicked off an update (running with nice), and will post back. To clarify, this is an old Dell 8250 with a 2.53GHz P4...pretty ancient.
Compiling Palemoon 28.7.2 with gcc 8.3.0 (using nice) took me almost exactly 12 hours:
time nice emerge -auv palemoon
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild     U ~] www-client/palemoon-28.7.2::palemoon [28.5.0::palemoon] USE="devtools gtk2 jemalloc official-branding optimize -dbus -debug -gnome (-gtk3) -necko-wifi -pulseaudio -threads -valgrind" CPU_FLAGS_X86="sse sse2" 0 KiB
....
real	722m4.230s
user	550m32.601s
sys	33m4.531s
Also note that I only have 2 GB of RAM which is a big factor as well. No possible way could I compile FF I'd imagine, even if it didn't require rust (the rust source alone is like 275 MB....ouch).
Tom

Thanks for the feedback Tom. Ive watched a few of linus tech tips videos where he uses some top tier hardware and has compiled FF in under 30 minutes which is pretty decent, but i think the machine had a cpu with 64 cores and over 300 GB of ram. Cant remember which video at the moment.

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#1 2019-11-20 21:58:26

No dbus and compiling FF

#2 2019-11-21 15:05:36

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#3 2019-11-21 16:57:04

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#4 2019-11-22 16:02:00

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#5 2019-11-23 14:18:04

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#6 2019-11-24 05:57:36

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#7 2019-11-24 16:19:51

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#8 2019-11-25 14:23:39

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#9 2019-11-25 18:17:01

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#10 2019-11-25 22:42:02

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#11 2019-11-26 13:41:03

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#12 2019-11-26 14:14:46

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#13 2019-11-26 14:32:44

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#14 2019-11-26 23:56:03

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#15 2019-11-27 00:47:15

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#16 2019-11-27 11:26:52

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#17 2019-11-27 12:15:50

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#18 2019-11-27 13:42:44

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#19 2019-11-27 18:29:14

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#20 2019-11-27 20:19:24

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#21 2019-11-28 01:33:29

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#22 2019-11-28 11:21:41

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

#23 2019-11-28 11:48:38

Re: No dbus and compiling FF

Board footer