Ubuntu command line installation + minimal X.
herlo1 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 6 23:13:49 MDT 2008
> SSH intercepts the X client-server traffic at the IP level. So in
> theory all I need is the client (Emacs) side of X on the headless
> box. Unfortunately the good folks at Debian seen to package the whole
> kazoo, client and sever, together. OK, I can live with that.
This was my point in the beginning
> (I'm using X terminology here: the program is the client, and the
> server is the keyboard and monitor. They can be on the same or
> different machines. Unfortunately the terminology gets confusing. If
> you use SSH, then the X client [the program] runs on the SSH server,
> and the X server is on the SSH client. Got that?)
I understand this, the point I am trying to make is that ssh -X can do what
you need, nothing more is required from your machine as long as the client
has an X server running.
> Emacs doesn't have to have the X libs to run; if it doesn't find them
> it happily runs as a console application. If it finds them, it will
> use them. Try running Emacs in a console.
I have, hate it and don't want to submit myself to that hell anymore. But I
understand the desire.
> One thing I don't understand (among many) is why installing Emacs
> causes aptitude to uninstall a bunch of stuff I had just installed.
>From the beginning of our conversation, I've tried to point to this exact
statement. The reason has to do with the way the dpkg specification file is
constructed. The package maintainer is the one who determines the
requirements for each package. While I agree that emacs doesn't require X
to run, apparently the dpkg maintainer believes its in your best interest.
I'm not an Ubuntu user, but I know that Fedora does similar things to help
out users. Its simple enough to rebuild an rpm without libs that I don't
need, but it requires a source package and a little know-how. I suppose
recompiling is more hassle than it is worth ey? (even if its just rebuilding
More information about the PLUG