[arch-general] Removing unused locales?
Hi, it occurred to me today to check how much disk space /usr/share/locale was using on my system. Turned out to be 449.43M, though I only use en and es locales, which are in the code in the first case and ~13M in the second. Would it make sense to remove the extra ones? I mean, I don't think anyone will switch back and forth that many languages (220 on my system), but it would be just stupid to make extra i18n packages for everything... so, should pacman remove the unneeded languages on package installation? -- Salud! Nicolás Reynolds, xmpp:fa...@kiwwwi.com.ar omb:http://identi.ca/fauno blog:http://selfdandi.com.ar/ gnu/linux user #455044 http://parabolagnulinux.org http://endefensadelsl.org pgpO8Pf0O6AV2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Removing unused locales?
Am Mittwoch 29 Dezember 2010, 20:10:19 schrieb Nicolás Reynolds: > Hi, it occurred to me today to check how much disk space /usr/share/locale > was using on my system. Turned out to be 449.43M, though I only use en and > es locales, which are in the code in the first case and ~13M in the > second. > > Would it make sense to remove the extra ones? I mean, I don't think anyone > will switch back and forth that many languages (220 on my system), but it > would be just stupid to make extra i18n packages for everything... so, > should pacman remove the unneeded languages on package installation? Hi Nicolás, you find localepurge in the AUR. It removes unneccessary locales from your system everytime you execute it. configuration is done in a config-file, so you easy can call localepurge without any options. Sure, purge the locales not automagically done by pacman, but it does its job as you requested. Mybe its suitable for you.
Re: [arch-general] Removing unused locales?
El 29/12/10 08:23, Thomas Bahn dijo: > Am Mittwoch 29 Dezember 2010, 20:10:19 schrieb Nicolás Reynolds: > > Hi, it occurred to me today to check how much disk space /usr/share/locale > > was using on my system. Turned out to be 449.43M, though I only use en and > > es locales, which are in the code in the first case and ~13M in the > > second. > > > > Would it make sense to remove the extra ones? I mean, I don't think anyone > > will switch back and forth that many languages (220 on my system), but it > > would be just stupid to make extra i18n packages for everything... so, > > should pacman remove the unneeded languages on package installation? > > Hi Nicolás, > > you find localepurge in the AUR. It removes unneccessary locales from your > system everytime you execute it. configuration is done in a config-file, so > you > easy can call localepurge without any options. > > Sure, purge the locales not automagically done by pacman, but it does its job > as you requested. Mybe its suitable for you. :o thanks! -- Salud! Nicolás Reynolds, xmpp:fa...@kiwwwi.com.ar omb:http://identi.ca/fauno blog:http://selfdandi.com.ar/ gnu/linux user #455044 http://parabolagnulinux.org http://endefensadelsl.org pgpEP3NBVApDf.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [arch-general] Removing unused locales?
You can also try Bleachbit from AUR, a complete cleaner for your system. 2010/12/29, Nicolás Reynolds : > El 29/12/10 08:23, Thomas Bahn dijo: >> Am Mittwoch 29 Dezember 2010, 20:10:19 schrieb Nicolás Reynolds: >> > Hi, it occurred to me today to check how much disk space >> > /usr/share/locale >> > was using on my system. Turned out to be 449.43M, though I only use en >> > and >> > es locales, which are in the code in the first case and ~13M in the >> > second. >> > >> > Would it make sense to remove the extra ones? I mean, I don't think >> > anyone >> > will switch back and forth that many languages (220 on my system), but >> > it >> > would be just stupid to make extra i18n packages for everything... so, >> > should pacman remove the unneeded languages on package installation? >> >> Hi Nicolás, >> >> you find localepurge in the AUR. It removes unneccessary locales from your >> >> system everytime you execute it. configuration is done in a config-file, >> so you >> easy can call localepurge without any options. >> >> Sure, purge the locales not automagically done by pacman, but it does its >> job >> as you requested. Mybe its suitable for you. > > :o thanks! > > -- > Salud! > Nicolás Reynolds, > xmpp:fa...@kiwwwi.com.ar > omb:http://identi.ca/fauno > blog:http://selfdandi.com.ar/ > gnu/linux user #455044 > > http://parabolagnulinux.org > http://endefensadelsl.org > -- Enviado desde mi dispositivo móvil
Re: [arch-general] [core/filesystem 2010.10-1 -> 2010.12-1] breaks makepkg and firefox
> Works for me. > What are your /tmp permissions after installing the filesystem package? > That's where the <<< used in lines 268 and 272 will be creating a > temporary file with random name. > It's odd that it would be returning an errno=0 instead of EPERM, though. > > Hi Linas, First of all, sorry for the (very) late reply and thanks for your interest, there were some not so good changes in my life lately and I couldn't answer early :) Following your suggestion I did some research on this issue and this is what I found: /tmp folder permissions are the same after installing the new package, however (and this is the real thing) I found every normal user in the system are given root privileges, that's why makepkg fails, because it tries to compile the package as root; if I launch makepkg with --asroot argument it while run ok. I found too that adding a new user after upgrading core/filesystem it's created as expected without any issues. Anyways, if no problem arise I think I will wait until next package update and try to upgrade it but in the event it's totally necessary to upgrade this package seems I will need to do that 'trick' of creating a new user after upgrading and migrating my actual user to the new one. Thank you very much again! Last, wish you all people the best for the upcoming year: Happy New Year! =D
Re: [arch-general] [arch-dev-public] Breaking the unspoken rule: AUR helper in [community]
Am Thu, 30 Dec 2010 11:38:34 +0800 schrieb Ray Rashif : > We didn't even conclude a previous discussion [1] (if we did then it's > all in the negative), and now there is one of those tools in the > repositories? Honestly, I don't think this is fair practice as it > undermines the initiatives of others before who did not get the green > for stuff like this, and it ignores the importance of general > consensus. Given that it is such a grey area, there should be an > official discussion and possibly a vote. Now there is no reason why > things like slurpy and other download/upload helpers shouldn't get in. > > [1] > http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2010-November/011887.html It seems to have been moved from [community] to AUR again. Heiko
