Porteus Package Manager bug reports

New features which should be implemented in Porteus; suggestions are welcome. All questions or problems with testing releases (alpha, beta, or rc) should go in their relevant thread here, rather than the Bug Reports section.
User avatar
brokenman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5571
Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 03:50
Distribution: Porteus v3.2rcX all desktops
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#16 by brokenman » 25 Oct 2012, 19:38

Thanks, i'll check it out. I have removed your duplicate post.
How do i become super user?
Wear your underpants on the outside and put on a cape.

User avatar
francois
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5078
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
Distribution: kde xfce porteus manjaro kubun
Location: Enfin l'été, le changement climatique attendu: le soleil.

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#17 by francois » 30 Nov 2012, 16:20

I did not know where to put this link. Maybe you are already far beyond the scope of the project with PPM. Anyway, I thought that it could be interesting for you brokenman, but also maybe to bigbass (it is said to be based on slapt-get), depending on how the package manager is built.

Slackpack:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions ... er-758501/

Citation:
"Slackpack has a friendly GUI environment and it can install
packages, list installed packages, remove Slackware Linux packages
(.tgz or .txz) and convert to .tgz format from .deb and .rpm.

Slackpack can also create Slackware Linux .tgz packages from application's source code. ... in the latest version (1.1.8) Slackpack has been ported to Qt4... "

The maintainer MysticalGroovy is leaving the project and offering it to the community:
http://www.slax.org/forum.php?action=vi ... ntID=82777
Voltaire: Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 1319
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: Porteus 3.1.0 x86-64 XFCe
Location: Germany

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#18 by Rava » 12 Dec 2012, 08:53

brokenman, the GUI acts quite ugly when you run a light on dark style, like me with Nodoka-Midnight on XFCe.

The standard text colour is a very light grey (almost white) and the standard background is a very dark grey (almost black)

Now, part of your PPM define its own colours, but it also uses the system default.

This results in white background and in near white text, which cannot be read.

Like with the menus, only when i highlight an entry I can read it. But the other info on the main window with white background using my standard font colour I cannot highlight.

Which toolkit do you use? Me thinks you can define text colours in that, yes?

(I can provide screenshots if you need them, but it should be the same when you run XFCe Porteus and also choose Nodoka-Midnight)
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
brokenman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5571
Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 03:50
Distribution: Porteus v3.2rcX all desktops
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#19 by brokenman » 12 Dec 2012, 11:48

Yes please provide screenshots. I only use a custom style for the splash screen and initial screen that asks you to choose a folder in which i have a custom background. All other windows should conform to your current GTK style.
How do i become super user?
Wear your underpants on the outside and put on a cape.

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 1319
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: Porteus 3.1.0 x86-64 XFCe
Location: Germany

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#20 by Rava » 12 Dec 2012, 14:37

Image

I cannot provide the initial screen when PPM asks for its non union folder, but at the bottom there is also nearly white text on white background... since PPM no longer asks me that. What file do I have to delete so that PPM asks me again?


(And: Yes, the title of the current running window can hardly be read, a bug in that Nodoka-Midnight style, me thinks.)
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
Ahau
King of Docs
King of Docs
Posts: 1331
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 15:18
Distribution: LXDE & Xfce 32/64-bit
Location: USA

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#21 by Ahau » 14 Dec 2012, 18:33

I haven't tested this myself (stuck in windows atm), but one thing you might try is to empty your ~/.gtkrc-2.0 file. I recently discovered that Porteus-XFCE 1.2 inherits this file in 002-xorg.xzm from the standard edition, which messes a bit with the theme. You might have discovered that already, in which case you can ignore this post. Otherwise, try:

echo "" > ~/.gtkrc-2.0

then log out and back in to Xfce.
Please take a look at our online documentation, here. Suggestions are welcome!

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 1319
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: Porteus 3.1.0 x86-64 XFCe
Location: Germany

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#22 by Rava » 14 Dec 2012, 21:10

@Ahau...

Could be a reason, in there is this line

Code: Select all

include "/usr/share/themes/Nodoka-Aqua/gtk-2.0/gtkrc"
and I sure am not using that theme/style.

I will give you heads up as soon as I managed to restart X... (since it does interrupt the work-flow)
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
Ahau
King of Docs
King of Docs
Posts: 1331
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 15:18
Distribution: LXDE & Xfce 32/64-bit
Location: USA

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#23 by Ahau » 14 Dec 2012, 21:33

Yes, that is the point of concern. Let us know how it looks once you get a chance to log out/in. This may not be the cause, however, as I don't know off-hand if PPM's dialog uses font colors that pull directly from the gtk theme or not.
Please take a look at our online documentation, here. Suggestions are welcome!

User avatar
brokenman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5571
Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 03:50
Distribution: Porteus v3.2rcX all desktops
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#24 by brokenman » 15 Dec 2012, 00:54

Damn you're right. That is even uglier than my mirror. Your style is pulling from your default gtk for widgets but not for windows in general.

Here are the pertinent lines from PPM which is only for the splash screen.

Code: Select all

echo 'style "ppmbg"
{
  bg[NORMAL] = { 1.0, 1.0, 1.0 }
}
widget "GtkWindow" style "ppmbg"

Whatever you are using for a gtkrc (possible /root/.gtk-2.0 or .gtk-2.0-mine) you could try adding the style codeblock from above (changed to suit your colors) which will force the window background colour.

1.0, 1.0, 1.0 is white.
How do i become super user?
Wear your underpants on the outside and put on a cape.

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 1319
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: Porteus 3.1.0 x86-64 XFCe
Location: Germany

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#25 by Rava » 20 Dec 2012, 01:55

brokenman wrote:Whatever you are using for a gtkrc (possible /root/.gtk-2.0 or .gtk-2.0-mine) you could try adding the style codeblock from above (changed to suit your colors) which will force the window background colour.

1.0, 1.0, 1.0 is white.
So far, so... okay, but where does PPM define the text colour? When it makes the background white, it needs to define the text colour as black.

Or not define it at all is also okay. The standard style is white BG and black text anyway.

Then a style like mine uses whatever it defines, and that is readable as well...

I tried looking up details on your above codeblock, but found nothing about "bg" in http://developer.gnome.org/gtk3/3.5/GtkWindow.html :(

//edit
I hoped ppm is a script and I could comment out the above snippet, but alas I was wrong:

Code: Select all

root@porteus:~# file /opt/porteus-scripts/porteus-package-manager
/opt/porteus-scripts/porteus-package-manager: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, corrupted section header size
Cheers!
Yours Rava

User avatar
brokenman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5571
Joined: 27 Dec 2010, 03:50
Distribution: Porteus v3.2rcX all desktops
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#26 by brokenman » 20 Dec 2012, 18:28

How do i become super user?
Wear your underpants on the outside and put on a cape.

User avatar
francois
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5078
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 14:25
Distribution: kde xfce porteus manjaro kubun
Location: Enfin l'été, le changement climatique attendu: le soleil.

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#27 by francois » 11 Jan 2013, 03:30

I have tried PPM to make the libreoffice module(s). The libreoffice logo will appear but writer will not appear. As someone been able to make a functional libreoffice with PPM?

Thanks.
Voltaire: Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien.

User avatar
Hamza
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 1847
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 07:41
Distribution: Porteus
Location: France

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#28 by Hamza » 10 Feb 2013, 22:37

I'm having issue running Porteus Package Manager on Porteus 2.0 RC2 x86_64. I have unpacked the reset module present at /opt/ppm to root filesystem and when i'm starting a new instance of PPM, as always, i'll go make a search of a module. This time i chosen bluefish in development category. It has been found and i selected with dependency resolution activated. Everythings worked until it asks for resolution of a strange lib (can't remember name) and i accepted. It asked to confirm the download of 200Mb data related to Slackware packages database. I accepted and it frozen on "Testing repository link" status.

I'm having this issue on Porteus 2.0 x86_64 Release Candidate 2.

Here is what i'm having after some seconds. link


Thanks!
NjVFQzY2Rg==

User avatar
libernux
White ninja
White ninja
Posts: 28
Joined: 01 Nov 2011, 17:36
Distribution: porteus v3.1 32bit XFCE
Location: Netherlands

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#29 by libernux » 11 Feb 2013, 08:49

I had this also some time ago.
I solved it by disabling ipv6 in networkmanager.
HTH.
I was born with nothing and I still got most of it.

User avatar
Hamza
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 1847
Joined: 28 Dec 2010, 07:41
Distribution: Porteus
Location: France

Re: Porteus Package Manager bug reports

Post#30 by Hamza » 11 Feb 2013, 09:31

Ok, I'll see with brokenman :)

Thanks.
NjVFQzY2Rg==

Post Reply