On 24/08/2017 13:41, Roger Koehler wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:38 AM, Roger Koehler
<[email protected]> wrote:
My apologies if this has already been addressed. I was unable to
search the mailing list archives using chromium and gmane is down.
Using jhalfs, trying to build gvfs, gcr is required but fails to build
with this message:
configure: error: Package requirements (gtk+-3.0 >= 3.12 gtk+-x11-3.0
= 3.12) were not met:
No package 'gtk+-3.0' found
No package 'gtk+-x11-3.0' found
Even though jhalfs reports no errors after building GTK+3, I found
this in the log:
(several .png files are installed previous to this)
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644 ./html/zoom_in_cursor.png
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644 ./html/zoom_out_cursor.png
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/gtkdoc-rebase", line 28, in <module>
from gtkdoc import common, config, rebase
File "/usr/share/gtk-doc/python/gtkdoc/rebase.py", line 28, in <module>
from six import iteritems, iterkeys
ImportError: No module named six
make[5]: *** [Makefile:1033: install-data-local] Error 1
make[5]: Leaving directory '/sources/gtk3/gtk+-3.22.18/docs/reference/gdk'
make[4]: *** [Makefile:780: install-am] Error 2
make[4]: Leaving directory '/sources/gtk3/gtk+-3.22.18/docs/reference/gdk'
make[3]: *** [Makefile:547: install-recursive] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory '/sources/gtk3/gtk+-3.22.18/docs/reference'
make[2]: *** [Makefile:549: install-recursive] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources/gtk3/gtk+-3.22.18/docs'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:722: install-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources/gtk3/gtk+-3.22.18'
Any ideas what "No module named six" might mean?
Looking through the BLFS Index, it appears that there is a Python
module named six. Should this be added to the required dependencies?
It is in the required dependencies of gtk-doc. But since it
is marked "required (runtime)" jhalfs does not pick it...
I plan to extend jhalfs dependency engine for this case, but
not before BLFS 8.1...
Also, jhalfs does not stop at the above error because of
the && between commands. From "man bash" about "set -e":
-----
Exit immediately if a pipeline (which may consist of a
single simple command), a list, or a compound command
(see SHELL GRAMMAR above), exits with a non-zero status.
*The shell does not exit* if the command that fails is
part of the command list immediately following a while
or until keyword, part of the test following the if or
elif reserved words, part of any command executed in a
&& or || list except the command following the final &&
or ||, any command in a pipeline but the last, or if the
command's return value is being inverted with !.
----
I have a plan to remove the && in jhalfs, but doing it
blindly may break the logics of commands like:
---
[[-f somefile ]] &&
do something
---
so it might take some time.
But my main thought about this is that instructions in
the BLFS book should not have those &&, and rely instead
on the user's testing errors after each command (or
using set -e).
Pierre
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
