Posting from a virtualbox gentoo guest, nice to have this ebuild now in portage. However, during install "vboxadd-client" cannot be found >>> Install virtualbox-guest-additions-1.6.4 into /var/tmp/portage/app-emulation/virtualbox-guest-additions-1.6.4/image/ category app-emulation * Installing vboxadd module * Installing vboxvfs module install: cannot stat `vboxadd-xclient': No such file or directory chmod: cannot access `/var/tmp/portage/app-emulation/virtualbox-guest-additions-1.6.4/image//usr/bin/vboxadd-xclient': No such file or directory The file's name after the build is not "vboxadd-xclient" but "VBoxClient" in "${S}"/out/linux.${ARCH}/release/bin/additions Thus either in the ebuild it has to be installed by doins VBoxClient or newins VBoxClient vboxadd-client 2nd: after deinstalling the guest-additions from SUN delivered with virtualbox I found that the virtualbox-guest-additions-1.6.4.ebuild is neither enabled to autoadjust the window size nor to use seamless mode. This is easy to fix, as they use a wrapper script for libXrandr to do the job. The wrapper script called VBoxRandR.sh is installed as VBoxRandR when using the SUN guest-additions. It is present in the source. When the script is copied over to /usr/bin seamless mode and auto resizing work like a charm. In order to have this work x11-libs/libXrandr has to be present as a dependency. I'll post a diffed ebuild. Reproducible: Always
Created attachment 162783 [details, diff] diff for the ebuild I'm not sure about having a use flag for seamless mode and even less sure about the fperms for VBoxRandR
Created attachment 162784 [details] just an emerge --info for completness
(In reply to comment #1) Hi, thanks for your report, seems that the name for vboxadd-client changed (my bad). > I'm not sure about having a use flag for seamless mode I vote for "keep it simple", currently we check for X, so i prefer to include the wrapper (VBoxRandR) by default. > and even less sure about the fperms for VBoxRandR 0755 should be comfortable. I commited the updated ebuild[1] on jokey's overlay[2], if you want to give it a try ;) (note: x11-apps/xrefresh was added as dependency because VBoxRandR needs it) Alessio. [1] virtualbox-guest-additions-1.6.4-r1.ebuild [2] http://overlays.gentoo.org/dev/jokey/browser/trunk/app-emulation
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #1) > Hi, > thanks for your report, seems that the name for vboxadd-client changed (my > bad). > > > I'm not sure about having a use flag for seamless mode > I vote for "keep it simple", currently we check for X, so i prefer to include > the wrapper (VBoxRandR) by default. > > > and even less sure about the fperms for VBoxRandR > 0755 should be comfortable. > > I commited the updated ebuild[1] on jokey's overlay[2], if you want to give it > a try ;) > > (note: x11-apps/xrefresh was added as dependency because VBoxRandR needs it) > > Alessio. > > [1] virtualbox-guest-additions-1.6.4-r1.ebuild > [2] http://overlays.gentoo.org/dev/jokey/browser/trunk/app-emulation > Yep, that builds fine and even better it works fine here with my laptop / external monitor running "virtual" gentoo together with a kvm switch and a 2nd computer running "real" gentoo. Two further questions (maybe to be addressed in different bugs). 1) The additions from sun implement a virtualbox.desktop file (located in the same dir as the VBoxRandr.sh script) in /etc/xdg/autostart alternatively to the file /etc/X11/xinit.d/98VBoxClient of this ebuild -- maybe also a change in the latest releases? 2) Does it make sense to have the xf86-input and xf86-video-virtualbox files as extra ebuilds, are they of use outside the guest-additions? Asking because a unified ebuild covering also the drivers would save a bunch of compile time.
(In reply to comment #4) > Two further questions (maybe to be addressed in different bugs). > 1) The additions from sun implement a virtualbox.desktop file (located in the > same dir as the VBoxRandr.sh script) in /etc/xdg/autostart alternatively to the > file /etc/X11/xinit.d/98VBoxClient of this ebuild -- maybe also a change in the > latest releases? mm correct me if i am wrong but, both files (98VBoxClient, virtualbox.desktop) are used for the same reason, what is the benefit in installing both? > 2) Does it make sense to have the xf86-input and xf86-video-virtualbox files as > extra ebuilds, are they of use outside the guest-additions? Asking because a > unified ebuild covering also the drivers would save a bunch of compile time. imho yes, not all the users are interested in the whole additions pack.
(In reply to comment #5) > mm correct me if i am wrong but, both files (98VBoxClient, virtualbox.desktop) > are used for the same reason, what is the benefit in installing both? > No, I meant to use the desktop file instead of the xinit.d file to keep your life a maintainer easier > > 2) Does it make sense to have the xf86-input and xf86-video-virtualbox files as > > extra ebuilds, are they of use outside the guest-additions? Asking because a > > unified ebuild covering also the drivers would save a bunch of compile time. > imho yes, not all the users are interested in the whole additions pack. > But, you pull the drivers in the guest-additions.ebuild with the X USE flag, that could also be used within the guest-additions.ebuild to decide whether the drivers are build. Nevertheless, I don't want to bother you, these were just some ideas that came into my mind when I built the first time your ebuilds after removing the additions from sun. Keep up your good work, these ebuilds do very well integrate the additions in a Gentoo' s way. Thanks
Suggestions InCVS now, thanks for the heads up and keep up the good work :)
