On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 04:24:16PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > >On 14-11-2014 14:11, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > >>Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > >>>On 13-11-2014 23:02, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > >>>>Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > >>>>>On 13-11-2014 19:24, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > >>>>>>Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > >> > >>>Three results: > >>> > >>>1. Build with boost-1.57.0 fails > >>> > >>>2. Build with boost-1.57.0 succeeds, disabling kleopatra > >>>(-DBUILD_kleopatra=OFF) > >>> > >>>Then, removed boost and installed boost-1.56.0 > >>> > >>>3. Build with boost-1.56.0 completes with success. > >>> > >>>Removed boost and installed boost-1.57.0, the result 1. was reproduced. > >> > >>That explains it. I never installed boost-1.57.0. > > > >So, I believe we should revert to older boost? > > For others on the list, opinions? Here is a list of packages we have listed > that can use boost: > > general/prog/swig.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/> for tests, and any of > the languages mentionned > general/prog/valgrind.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > general/genlib/clucene.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/> > general/genlib/exempi.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/> > kde/add/kdepim.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, and > kde/core/kdepimlibs.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, and > kde/core/kde-workspace.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > kde/core/akonadi.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, and one of: > server/databases/mariadb.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > x/lib/cairomm.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/> and > xsoft/office/abiword.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > xsoft/office/libreoffice.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > xsoft/other/ekiga.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > xsoft/other/gnash.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > xsoft/other/inkscape.xml: <xref linkend="boost"/>, > > I have not attempted with boost-1.57.0, but Fernando has run into a lot of > failures with it when building kdepim. > > -- Bruce
New versions of boost almost always cause build problems in some of the packages which use it. Sometimes waiting a little while means that other distros find workarounds, but at other times waiting does not help. If we are talking seriously about reverting it, can we have a list of which packages *have* already been built against it ? Perhaps, for some packages like boost, we should not jump in as soon as it is released, but instead add details to the ticket noting which packages (and versions) seem ok with it, and therefore listing which have not been built. And then at some point we can bring it back to the list and agree to try it, or else to find somebody to build the packages which are preventing it being used. I remember having to test a lot of packages before putting a new openssl version (the 1.0.0 series, I suppose) into the book. Or we can just say that this is development, temporarily disable the dep (we've done that in libreoffice - for boost in the past) and hope that something will eventually turn up. I hardly ever use cmake packages - is it possible to stop kdepim from building against boost by adding a definition when cmake is invoked ? Doing that will not solve all the problems, some packages require boost. ĸen -- Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady. Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
