Bug 154196 – installing e-9999 as enlightenment-0.17 breaks restart

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description whereami 2006-11-05 17:00:24 UTC]

the e-9999 ebuild currently renames the executable to enlightenment-0.17 to avoid conflicts with enlightenment 16 in case anyone wants both installed. It also patches enlightenment_start to reflect this. However, doing this now somehow breaks the restart function of enlightenment. Restarting E results in it just exiting. I haven't dug in to find out exactly why yet, but commenting out the enlightenment_start sed replacement and the rename fixes the problem. Either further patching is required, or we need to just give up the idea of having both versions of E installed.

[Comment 1 SpanKY 2006-11-05 17:39:23 UTC]

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 148564 ***

[Comment 2 whereami 2006-11-05 22:29:23 UTC]

sorry, not a duplicate of that bug. You may notice that I mentioned that solution in my report:

> It also patches enlightenment_start to reflect this.

and then I go on to report a problem different from the one in bug #148564: WITH the sed to "fix" enlightenment_start, E is broken: you cannot restart E, such as via
main menu -> Enlightenment -> Restart
or via
enlightenment_remote -restart

WITHOUT both the sed and the mv, restart works correctly.

Conclusion: the ebuild is breaking Enlightenment's restart function.

[Comment 3 Nils Larsson 2006-11-06 12:06:47 UTC]

If you don't have E16 installed you can copy the e-9999.ebuild to your overlay and remove the sed and mv operations and E17 will install as it is intended.

I'm not sure, but ln -s /usr/bin/enlightenment-0.17 /usr/bin/enlightenment might also work.

[Comment 4 whereami 2006-11-06 13:21:08 UTC]

(In reply to comment #3)
> If you don't have E16 installed you can copy the e-9999.ebuild to your overlay
> and remove the sed and mv operations and E17 will install as it is intended.

yes, that is how I tested that:
> WITHOUT both the sed and the mv, restart works correctly.

note that the presence of a workaround does not invalidate the bug.

[Comment 5 Nils Larsson 2006-11-07 08:22:26 UTC]

Isn't it possible to move the compatibility rename bit to E16?

[Comment 6 Weedy 2006-11-17 06:33:22 UTC]

better idea, add a USE flag that disables the rename. Some people (like me) are never going to install e16, but use e17 all day long. Give US the choice. That's why im on gentoo to begin with.

[Comment 7 Nils Larsson 2006-11-20 09:27:33 UTC]

(In reply to comment #6)
> better idea, add a USE flag that disables the rename. Some people (like me) are
> never going to install e16, but use e17 all day long. Give US the choice.
> That's why im on gentoo to begin with.
> 

You have the choice already, rip out the rename bits and bungle the ebuild in a overlay.

[Comment 8 SpanKY 2007-01-19 07:47:25 UTC]

you guys sure do whine a lot

overlay is fine now