dkg

Perfect, thank you.

I'm getting spam in my logs in my container from agetty like this: Jul 21 00:19:58 dkg agetty[5782]: /dev/tty1: cannot open as standard input: No such file or directory Jul 21 00:19:58 dkg agetty[5784]: /dev/tty3: cannot open as standard input: No such file or directory Jul 21 00:19:58 dkg agetty[5786]: /dev/tty5: cannot open as standard input: No such file or directory Jul 21 00:19:58 dkg agetty[5787]: /dev/tty6: cannot open as standard input: No such file or directory Jul 21 00:19:58 dkg agetty[5783]: /dev/tty2: cannot open as standard input: No such file or directory Jul 21 00:19:58 dkg agetty[5785]: /dev/tty4: cannot open as standard input: No such file or directory Which is true, those devices do not exist. And it makes sense that a container isn't going to have all these ttys, either. I just don't know how to tell it not to look for them. Thanks.

Believe me, I appreciate that multilib is a hack, and I've had plenty of issues with it over the years. And I can accept that my use case is uncommon. It's also a use case that is not addressed well by chroot or containers, unfortunately. Hope my feedback was useful, anyway. By the way, I cannot figure out why the forums do not send me an email when someone replies to a post or thread I'm following. Don't know if it's just me or what.

I'm aware that and X server is going to magically appear in the chroot, but I was hoping xhost would make it unnecessary, though I was pretty sure going in that it would not. No, I did not, as I had no need to run 64-bit Windows apps. The point is, I could not copy the wine *prefixes* over. This, I did not anticipate. Not disaster, but definitely a pain. Gentoo still uses openrc by default. Meanwhile, I'm still limping along with Funtoo 1.2 on that system.

Well, since a few weeks have passed with no suggestions for my difficulties, nor news of a solution in the near term, I guess I'm faced with "downgrading" this system to Gentoo. As much as I love Funtoo's extra features (enough that I've been a financial supporter of Funtoo for years), it just isn't providing the things I need for this system. Hope to bring it back to Funtoo one day.

Since adding the 'X' use flag to wine-vanilla/wine-staging (not currently mentioned in guide), I can actually launch a program now. However, I could not use a copy of the existing wine prefix, as it complained that it "is not a 64-bit installation, it cannot be used with a 32-bit wineserver." I'd have to rebuild the prefix from scratch, not knowing all the tweaks I made to get it where it is. With work, I could probably copy the things needed to bring it into shape. But, it doesn't have access to any of the files from either my home folder nor NFS mounts. I'd have to bind remount a number of things - I actually gave up remounting /home due to some issues I ran into, and concerns about sharing files between them, especially given 64-bit vs. 32-bit. For one of my applications, I will currently load an optical disk using KDE's mounting mechanisms to '/run/media/$user/...' then have the Windows app read the disk. I'm not seeing how to do that without a lot of hand-holding. Also haven't figured out to launch an application without the whole tedious su/xhost/chroot/su sequence. I also just realized that in one app, foobar2000, I use a number of features that allow me to do things like launch Konsole or Dolphin to the folder containing the music file; as-is, I could only get this to launch one of those apps within the chroot - but I would want to be using the "native" apps, not install KDE into the chroot. In other words, so far, this looks to be a very poor substitute for multi-lib, at least where running wine is concerned, and where the goal is not to puts the apps in a chroot jail.

No success so far. Following the wiki instructions, when I run winecfg at the end, I get the following. I did run the 'xhost' command. 0009:err:winediag:nodrv_CreateWindow Application tried to create a window, but no driver could be loaded. 0009:err:winediag:nodrv_CreateWindow The graphics driver is missing. Check your build!

In the meantime, can anybody share experience with running apps, particularly apps in wine, using a chroot as described in the wiki? It's not clear to me how to transparently launch applications in the chroot from a desktop (Plasma launcher/widgets). Or whether file type associations can work.

Yes, I don't know why I left "stage3" out of the post. I was not aware that they could run different versions of funtoo. If I find time, I will give it a try this weekend. Thanks.

I have a few important apps that I run in wine (not Steam or games). Before I go all in with the 1.3 upgrade, I wanted to try creating a 32-bit chroot in 1.2 to make sure I could get wine and apps working. The problem is, I don't see any 32-bit tarballs available for 1.2 - only 64-bit. How else might one go about this?

The system upgrade is now complete. Thanks for the help, @palica.

I think the Upgrade Instructions may be missing steps regarding the python upgrade. It says to run these commands: # emerge -u1 =dev-lang/python-3.6* # emerge -C =dev-lang/python-3.4* Both systems that I've upgraded to 1.2, I got this message when trying to remove python-3.4: [root@wolfie 73% etc]# emerge -C =dev-lang/python-3.4* * This action can remove important packages! In order to be safer, use * `emerge -pv --depclean <atom>` to check for reverse dependencies before * removing packages. >>> These are the packages that would be unmerged: * Not unmerging package dev-lang/python-3.4.6-r1 since there is no valid * reason for Portage to unmerge currently used Python interpreter. >>> No packages selected for removal by unmerge I don't recall exactly what I did the last time (it was some time ago), but today I tried first to use 'eselect python set'. This removed the '(fallback)' status for python3.6, but did not get rid of the above message. I ended up using 'eselect python edit' and entering a '-' before python3.4. This has happened to me twice now, which suggests it's not something weird that I did.

The 'emerge --emptytree' would do this anyway, dummy! :) Never mind, folks.

I'm curious. The Upgrade Instructions have one upgrade gcc, then set the subarch. It seems you'd want subarch turned on beforehand so the gcc binary gets the benifits of the optimizations. Or, if that doesn't work because the older gcc doesn't work with the subarch profiles, then it seems best to 'emerge -u1 gcc', then 'epro subarch', then 'emerge -1 gcc'. Is this a waste of effort?

Are you saying that there are steps I should follow to avoid 1.3? I did not put 1.3 in ego.conf, if that's what you mean.