After emerging gnome-extra/gdesklets-core, when running "gdesklets shell" I get the following errors: $ gdesklets shell You're running gDesklets for the first time. gDesklets will start a requirements check now... Checking requirements: - sys ... found - xml.parsers.expat ... found - xml.sax ... found - gtk ... missing Version check failed. GTK python bindings (pygtk2) version >= 2.4.0 and GTK+ version >= 2.4.0 are required. Please make sure that the required software is installed. Also try to avoid having multiple versions of a library/binding on your system. gDesklets won't work if you don't have all necessary dependencies installed on your system. THE STARTUP WILL BE CANCELLED NOW! Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Emerge gdesklets-core 2. run gdesklet shell 3. Actual Results: An error reporting that I need to install more software Expected Results: Ebuilds should identify all dependencies and install them. I don't run gnome desktop. Currently using xfce4.
Created attachment 61917 [details] ebuild with more dependency checking
pygtk>=2.4 depends on >=gtk+-2.4, so there doesn't really need to be an explicit dependency on gtk+ in the gdesklets-core ebuild. The ebuild is good as it stands; it seems like your system might have something wrong with it if the pygtk dep didn't do what it should've. I'll remove the dependency to gtk+-2.2.
i see now. anyway, the current latest stable ebuild (0.35.1) compiled neatly on my machine, but i'm encountering "file could not be read" errors... gnomevfs _could_ be broken.. there is a link over at gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org (http://gdesklets.gnomedesktop.org/news.php?offset=10) explaining about this unusual gnomevfs URI error and the funny thing is, this line if (gnomevfs.exists(gnomevfs.URI(uri))): is infact the one being used. i've checked and verified that i have read permissions right but still to no avail.
The page on the news to which you refer is actually a fix to get SideCandy to work for version 0.33.1. It's implemented in the ebuild for 0.33.1 and exists in the distribution for later versions. What about this "file could not be read" bug you're talking about? If there isn't an open bug on it already, open a new one please.
