Tiny Core Linux
Tiny Core Extensions => TCE Talk => Topic started by: Guy on February 14, 2010, 04:16:16 AM
-
Some applications start after clicking on them in the On Demand menu.
Others don't, but start if you click them in the On Demand menu, then click on them in the main menu.
I assume this can be easily reproduced. Let me know if I am wrong.
-
Perhaps you have a mix of ondemand menu items made prior to this new feature.
Delete those prior ones and recreate. They are located in /home/.wmx/OnDemand/
-
Deleted and the same result.
Examples of programs where this occurs are:
Chromium Browser
Open Office
Epdfview
It makes me wonder if I have something wrong somewhere. See if these work for you.
-
I regularly use epdfview and it is in my ondemand menu. Subsquent clicks from there runs ok.
Note that for epdfview I changed both the title and binary when prompted.
The extension name is epdfview-0.1.6.tcz so I entered the following:
Title: Epdfview
Binary: epdfview
-
After changing the title and binary to epdfview it works.
This is something to look into, because not everyone will change it.
I still have not been able to make the others work yet (in this short time).
-
The issue is that not all extensions have a menu item from which I could try to extract such from.
Not all even have binaries from which to run, meta-extensions, i.e., compilete, which BTW, I have in my ondemand section.
I agree it would be nice but would require adopting some additional standards for the extensions.
I have introduced the concept and infrastructure because I use it and find it most helpful in providing even faster boot times while still allowing quick and easy access to my less frequently used programs.
-
They all work if I change the title and binary to the same as the name following /usr/local/bin/ in /usr/local/tce.menu.
-
I think the OnDemand is a brilliant concept.
I think it is a good idea to adopt additional standards for extensions. Probably for version 3, as it probably won't be too long now.
-
Did you see this?
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=4732.0
There were not many comments, so I wonder if many people saw it.
I think, in the future it is a good idea to merge the main menu and the OnDemand menu. This is one way it could be done.
The people making extensions could make the menu.
It could also be done by running something like OnDemand.
Just ideas. You decide how you want it.
-
flwm does not use a file for its menu, so ordering is by item naming convention, another reason for my prompt for title.
I will update it to temporarily mount the selected item, and if it has a menu extract and use that otherwise prompt the user for title and binary.
-
I'm having some difficulty getting open office to run from wbar. It doesn't seem to start from the location specified in the oo2 script in /usr/local/tce.menu
I need to run "./soffice" command from the /usr/local/oo2/program directory to make it work.
I'm not sure how to change the oo2 script in /usr/local/tce.menu/
-
don't know if it is related: with my gecko netbook, i get
Illegal instruction
while starting sylpheed-gtk1; i am using microcore 2.9rc4
-
alu, could you use gdb to see which part causes it?
gdb sylpheed
bt full
quit
-
gdb sylpheed returns
(no debugging symbols found)
(gdb) bt full
No stack
-
OK, my fault, incomplete instructions.
gdb sylpheed
run
bt full
quit
-
(gdb) run
Starting program: /usr/local/bin/sylpheed
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
(no debugging symbols found)
Program received signal SIGILL, Illegal instruction.
0x080a5018 in ?? ()
Program received signal SIGILL, Illegal instruction.
0x080a5018 in ?? ()
(gdb) bt full
#0 0x080a5018 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#1 0x0a0f4a40 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#2 0x0000c415 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#3 0xb7ffa8e8 in _r_debug ()
No symbol table info available.
#4 0x00000001 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#5 0xbfcf8680 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#6 0xb7feb3ce in _dl_fixup () from /lib/ld-linux.so.2
No symbol table info available.
#7 0xb7f2cd17 in gtk_editable_set_selection ()
from /usr/local/lib/libgtk-1.2.so.0
No symbol table info available.
#8 0x080a9068 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#9 0x0a0f4a40 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
#10 0x00000000 in ?? ()
No symbol table info available.
-
If the sylpheed extension has been stripped, then gdb will probably not work - you would have to recompile it without stripping
-
I do wonder though if it's sylpheed itself or one of the libs.
-
Bizarre, oo2 working now. The only thing I did different was start firefox ondemand before OO.
-
sylpheed gtk1 outputs the same illegal instruction with mc 2.9rc5. gdb sylpheed shows the same messages
-
sylpheed gtk2 works nicely; ok, i can use it instead of the gtk1 version
-
Bizarre, oo2 working now. The only thing I did different was start firefox ondemand before OO.
There are a few applications which have been updated and their dependencies have been updated. As a result, they may not start. (I can't be sure in your situation)
Run Apps Audit -> Dependencies -> Update Dep Database.
Then run Update Apps.
You can check that everything is correct by running Apps Audit -> Dependencies -> Display All with Missing Dependencies.
If you are using an older version, you may not have these. If that is the case, update to the latest version.
After doing this, let us know your results.
-
Concerning the Sylpheed_GTK1 problem:
I get the "illegal instruction" error when starting the gtk1-builds of Sylpheed and BonEcho.
The gtk1 version of Beaver is working flawlessly, so one can rule out a problem with gtk1 itself.
I did some research on the homepage mentioned in the description of BonEcho (gtk1) and apparently it was compiled on an i684-machine. (www.lamarelle.org/mo-zi-lla/mozilla.php (http://www.lamarelle.org/mo-zi-lla/mozilla.php)
The computer I am using is an old 200MHZ Pentium, which corresponds to, as far as I know, i586.
Maybe this could be the problem? (and your problem, also?)
It would be really great, if these (gtk1) programs could be compiled in a manner, that old CPUs can make use of them.
Actually, since gtk1 programs perform significantly better on my device, it would be sad to have to use "newer"/slower software even when "older"/faster software exists but can't be used just because the system is too old for it.
By the way, TinyCoreLinux is a wonderful distribution, especially for older machines! (and I have tried many...)
Many compliments to the contributers!
-
compiling on an i686 machine shouldn't be a problem as long as the standard tc CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS are used to ensure i486 compatibility.
-
The Bonecho gtk1 build from lamarelle is i686. I will look for a 586 or 486 build as the whole purpose of a gtk1 version is for older machines.
-
I can't find a bonecho gtk1 build other than the i686 from lamarelle, so I will try to build it as i486 compatible and gtk1.
-
Freetype errors have prevented building a gtk1 Bonecho package, and I don't have time to troubleshoot. May try again later.
-
Thank you for trying, Jason!
I have contacted the creator of the original package and he gracefully made a static bulid for i386. Here is the link:
http://www.lamarelle.org/firefox/2.0.0.20/i386-static/firefox-2.0.0.20.en-US.linux-i386-gtk1-static.2010-04-12.tar.bz2 (http://www.lamarelle.org/firefox/2.0.0.20/i386-static/firefox-2.0.0.20.en-US.linux-i386-gtk1-static.2010-04-12.tar.bz2)
-
Great, I will update the extension with that one soon.
-
Ah, I see "No xft, No freetype2" is mentioned on the site, which would perhaps of allowed a build. I had left all the configure options the same except for enabling gtk1 as I never actually built a gtk1 firefox. At the very least this build saved a bit of time, am packaging it now. Thanks for bringing up the need for a 386 build at their site.