User talk:Waldo Lemmer

From Gentoo Wiki
Jump to:navigation Jump to:search
Note
Before creating a discussion or leaving a comment, please read about using talk pages. To create a new discussion, click here. Comments on an existing discussion should be signed using ~~~~:
A comment [[User:Larry|Larry]] 13:52, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
: A reply [[User:Sally|Sally]] 20:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
:: Your reply ~~~~

SELinux/Installation

Talk status
This discussion is done as of 2024-04-11.

May I ask why you undid the changes made by WavyEbuilder? --Lars Hint (talk) 06:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how that happened. I undid my undo. Thanks for alerting me — Waldo Lemmer 07:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Looks like I didn't undo my undo. There seem to be conflicts. I'll try to do it manually. — Waldo Lemmer 07:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Could you double-check that everything looks fine now? — Waldo Lemmer 07:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Everything seems to be okay now. ^_^ --Lars Hint (talk) 07:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Double redirects

Talk status
This discussion is done as of 2024-04-21.

Answering to your question: If you open the page and click "Tools" (top right menu, next to notifications) -> "What links here", you will see all the references to that page. However, some pages that are not directly linked to will also be shown. This is due to Template:See also. If there is a link in the description of a page mentioned in "See also", that page will be displayed. This leads to another problem: if you fix a problematic page, "See also" is not updated automatically, but uses a cached value, so every page that links to the problematic page has to be updated somehow. Help:Redirects#Double_redirects also suggests using Special:DoubleRedirects, but this special page does not work as expected, almost all types of double redirects are not shown there. --Lars Hint (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Category templates

Talk status
This discussion is done.

Hello, Waldo! I still can't stop thinking about your words that categories in their current form are not predictable. If looking at a list of all the categories, it's obvious that everyone names the categories whatever they want. Some use capitalization in every word, some don't. This resulted in duplicate categories (e.g. Category:Embedded systems and Category:Embedded Systems). And as I see it, such duplicates are always resolved in favor of using lowercase characters in words. So the question is, do all categories that don't follow this convention need to be renamed? Unfortunately, I've created tons of these categories (as you know). The reason for this was a pre-existing category that used the wrong convention: Category:Brother Printers. Wikipedia also uses lowercase (example: Lenovo laptops). So what do you think about it? --Lars Hint (talk) 13:12, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Category naming convention

Talk status
This discussion is done.

I would vote against unnamed parameters, as it will be difficult to work with the template if more arguments come up in the future. This will be especially a problem if parsing the company name by title prefix is implemented in the future. And yes, two categories are filled intentionally. We could even add one more category for series (as you proposed in the previous discussion). --Lars Hint (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Motherboards

Is there a reason to use ProductPage for motherboards? Motherboards have different sockets depending on the CPU manufacturer and CPU generation. --Lars Hint (talk) 05:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

I can modify ProductPage to accept either a socket or an architecture. In other words, it should accept one of arch= or socket=. — 05:58, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Oh right, it has unnamed parameters. But you know what I mean.
Waldo Lemmer 06:00, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
So using unnamed parameters was a mistake. Let's switch to named parameters. Add the temporary optional parameters: company, type, arch. And I'll update the notebook pages again. It won't take that much time, because all the parameters are already known. :) --Lars Hint (talk) 06:18, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Why was it a mistake? Parameter 3 can be repurposed for the socket (e.g. ASRock motherboards (AM4)). And if we want to have the arch and socket in separate parameters for some reason, the socket can use the fourth parameter. In either case, existing usages of {{ProductPage}} are unaffected, and the template code needs barely any modification (none in the first case).
Waldo Lemmer 06:27, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
You are right, it is easier to add a 4th parameter. In both cases it will require 2 not nested IF conditions (7 milliseconds in total). But I'm still not sure about sorting by socket. But it definitely doesn't make sense by architecture, I'm more than sure everything there will be AMD64. --Lars Hint (talk) 06:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
If we repurpose the third parameter for the socket, then no change is needed — {{ProductPage|ASRock|motherboards|AM4}} produces [[Category:ASRock motherboards (AM4)]].
Whether logic is needed when using a separate fourth parameter depends on the category name format: [[Category:ASRock motherboards (AMD64, AM4)]] or [[Category:ASRock motherboards (AMD64) (AM4)]]. In the former case, no logic is needed if the second parameter contains ", AM4".
Waldo Lemmer 06:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
The problem is that if there is a socket with the same name as the architecture, there will be problems. Also, people might think that the socket name is the name of the architecture. But maybe I'm overthinking it. --Lars Hint (talk) 07:07, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
But you are right, the name conflict can be solved by just passing ARM (socket) as the parameter. --Lars Hint (talk) 07:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
"if there is a socket with the same name as the architecture, there will be problems" Is there such a socket? And if that happens, which I doubt, we can simply change the socket's name, for example by appending "socket" to it, or making it a subpage of Category:Socket/.
Architectures go in Category:Computer architecture and sockets will go in Category:Sockets. And yes, I think you're overthinking it :)
I will be back in two hours.
Waldo Lemmer 07:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
I think we can temporarily freeze the discussion, the category isn't popular anyway. It's difficult for me to understand what is important to others in this case, as I don't buy motherboards. ProductPage does not require any modifications, so everything is fine at the moment. I'm a bit busy today, too. --Lars Hint (talk) 08:21, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Understandable. Should Boards be on hold as well?
Waldo Lemmer 08:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
We can still sort them by architecture, though. For Gentoo, only arch matters in any case. --Lars Hint (talk) 05:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Boards

I think socket type matters much less than architecture for SBCs, since microprocessors are often soldered on and boards come in a wide range of architectures.

Waldo Lemmer 08:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, boards should be sorted by architecture. But be careful, I put redirects on some pages, however the pages contain information that needs to be merged with other pages. There is another problem - the licensing of texts. There are lists of authors at the bottom that also need to be merged. --Lars Hint (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Can you give me an example or two, so I can see what you mean?
Waldo Lemmer 11:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Embedded_Handbook/Boards/Pandaboard and Embedded_Handbook/Boards/TrimSlice. And a few more in the Category:Boards. --Lars Hint (talk) 15:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Chromebooks

What do you think, is it fine if Chromebooks will have two calls of ProductPage? In this case Category:Chromebooks will be sorted as well, and the Chromebooks will be listed under Laptops too. --Lars Hint (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Would Category:Chromebooks represent the company or the form factor? I.e., "Chromebook laptops (AMD64)" or "Acer Chromebooks (AMD64)"? The latter sounds good to me. It will result in "Acer Chromebooks" and "Chromebooks (AMD64)" being created. All good so far.
But {{CompoundCategory}} will assign these two categories to "Acer", "Chromebooks" and "AMD64". This will result in "Acer" and "AMD64" now having Chromebook as well as laptop subcategories, with each Chromebook subcategory being a subset of the corresponding laptop subcategory.
To fix this, we need to ensure that "Acer Chromebooks" is not placed in "Acer" directly and "Chromebooks (AMD64)" not in AMD64. They should still be reachable from "Acer" and "AMD64", respectively, though, so they should be placed in "Acer laptops" and "Laptops (AMD64)", respectively.
In short, do everything as normal, except:
  • "Acer Chromebooks" has [[Category:Acer laptops]] instead of CompoundCategory.
  • "Chromebooks (AMD64)" has [[Category:Laptops (AMD64)]] instead of CompoundCategory.
We should create additional templates for this, with the interfaces {{template 1|company}} and {{template 2|arch}}. What should we call them? They should have "Chromebook" as part of their names, since that will be hard-coded. Or we can make them more generic (i.e. add another parameter to each). But I don't know where else they would be used — Netbooks?
Waldo Lemmer 11:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
The form factor (Acer Chromebooks (AMD64)). Is it really a problem that Chromebooks will be listed on the same level as "Laptops"? What about "2 in 1" laptops (tablet and laptop at the same time)? Those should also have 2 calls of ProductPage, and Tablets have the same level as Laptops. And I don't know what to do with Netbooks right now. --Lars Hint (talk) 11:46, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Is it really a problem that Chromebooks will be listed on the same level as "Laptops"?

It's not a problem. It's just not ideal. But I guess not all future Chromebooks will necessarily be laptops, so we should treat them like any other form factor. So we roll with your plan :)
Waldo Lemmer 11:53, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Category:Computers and Category:Desktops and Category:Mini_PCs

I think we need to eliminate Category:Computers. The definition of "Computer" is unclear. I also doubt that Category:Desktops should exist. Gentoo Wiki:Article Blueprints says "Desktops (Motherboards)". What about Category:Mini PCs? How the template will handle it? mini pcs -> 'Mini pcs'? --Lars Hint (talk) 14:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree about Computers. But I think keeping Desktops is reasonable — they're basically just non-portable laptops without peripherals. Every prebuilt PC has its quirks when installing Gentoo and has to be categorized somewhere. But maybe Mini PCs should go under Desktops.
They're called SFF PCs nowadays, anyway.
Whoops, I got this wrong. Mini PCs are not like small desktop PCs. Their architecture is more similar to that of laptops. I think they deserve their own category instead of Desktops. Or maybe both. — 08:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Case is not an issue. I should modify the template documentation to note that names should look like "mini PCs", although I don't know how to phrase that.
Waldo Lemmer 15:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

make.conf

Talk status
This discussion is done as of 2024-05-24.

Pretty user page, I'm jealous :) Could I politely ask you remove the make.conf you use please, this isn't because of the issues I have with setting it systemwide as it's your system not mine however, others might see this as a good idea to run as a new user and think Gentoo is broken because everything breaks around them :)

As for the article you want to write about it, I highly advise you speak to Sam before starting to make sure it can stay up as it really hits hard when you spend a day writing some cool and it has to be removed.

Otherwise keep up the good work please <3

Immolo (talk) 19:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree, I'll remove it.
As for the article I want to write, it's about creating custom profiles based on existing ones. That bullet point applies to the item above it, not below it. But thanks for the advice :)
Waldo Lemmer 19:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! Ah I see about the profiles. I recommend users normally follow Profile_(Portage)#Profiles_for_developers_and_power_users as while at the start it does seem a little overwhelming, it actually explains the whole process from beginner to expert that it was all I needed to start writing my own profiles for Gentoo when I started. If you have some ideas on how to improve that though then do please catch me on IRC one day to discuss as this is one of my interests in Gentoo that I try to follow closely.
Immolo (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
You're right, I should probably direct my energy in that page's direction. That's where I learned to create profiles.
Still, I think my motivations for modifying an existing profile should be documented somewhere. Maybe I'll do it on that page :)
Waldo Lemmer 02:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Please do edit if you can think of a better way to do it, I just have a huge interest in this so want to try and help.
Immolo (talk) 12:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Wine Thanks

Thank you for catching the red link on the Wine article! I'm pretty sure I checked 'What links here', but I probably thought the one I removed on the same page was the only one. ^^ Chiitoo (talk) 17:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Ah, that clears it up then. I should probably learn from that lesson as well — I usually just look for one occurrence.
Waldo Lemmer 03:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Kconfig box

Talk status
This discussion is done as of 2024-07-26.

Salute! I see you did a great job while I was absent, {{KEntry}} looks amazing! Should it only be used for kernel entries, or is it abstract? Do we have an alternative to {{KernelBox}} for non-kernel Kconfig? I would like to use it in the MrChromebox's_coreboot#Customization article. --Lars Hint (talk) 16:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!
We don't have a box for non-kernel Kconfig, but you can make your own using {{PreBox}}:
{{PreBox|Your content|title=<strong>Your title</strong>|label=KCONFIG|labelcolor=#4E9A06}}
KCONFIG Your title
Your content
{{KEntry}} doesn't have any rules specified for it in the guidelines, so use it wherever you want :)
Waldo Lemmer 05:26, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I created {{KconfigBox}} which is a copy of {{KernelBox}}, thank you! ^_^ --Lars Hint (talk) 17:01, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

References