On 17/11/2017 06:23, Thomas Trepl wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 16.11.2017, 01:52 -0500 schrieb Chris Staub:
On 11/16/17 1:48 AM, Thomas Trepl wrote:
Hi all,
seems so that python is a requirement to xcb-proto and not "only"
an
option:
xcb-proto-1.12.tar.bz2
./configure --prefix=/usr/X11 --sysconfdir=/etc --
localstatedir=/var --
disable-static
configure: WARNING: unrecognized options: --disable-static
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking for xmllint... no
configure: WARNING: xmllint not found; unable to validate against
schema.
checking for a Python interpreter with version >= 2.5... none
configure: error: no suitable Python interpreter found
That is on a LFS without python at all. I was on the way to build
all
the (cyclic) requirements for python (bluez, dbus, glib...) and
needed
xorg-libraries for dbus.
I know, by default python is installed in LFS so this error
shouldn't
come up anyhow, but the text in the instructions for xcb-proto
seems
incorrect (python isn't optional).
--
Thomas
Python 3 isn't given as required because it is assumed to be in an
LFS
system. Note that the optional dependency is Python *2*, as that
could
potentially be used instead of Python 3.
Ah, an interesting definition/interpretation of "optional". I allways
thought that optional means including additional features into the
actual package by providing the optional packages.
Not always: the same feature may be included by using different packages,
which often happens when 2 versions of a package can be used: Python[23]
of course, but also lcms/lcms2, readline/libedit, etc. We may decide to
require/recommend only one package, and to leave the other as optional.
Required are packages which must be there otherwise package will not
build.
Except when a package is in the LFS book, it is not mentioned as required.
Recommended packages are more or less same as optional but should be
there as the features they switch on on the actual package are seen as
very important.
There are a lot of reasons why a package could be recommended:
- because it brings a feature which makes the actual package more useful.
- because it simplifies the actual build
- because that feature may be needed if another package is built
using the actual package
- ...
But we try to stick to the following rule: if you have
LFS book+required+recommended, the instructions provided should
always work (if not, that's a bug!)
Anyway, its not that important but it looks to me as a bit of
inconsistency. Per definition above, we'd have to add Python2 to many
other packages as optional...
All the packages which had "Python2 or Python3" as a dependency
(either required or recommended) before Python3 was put into the
LFS book, should now have Python2 as an optional dependency.
But we may have missed some. Note that several packages still
require Python2.
Pierre
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
