Only in pbuilder: CMake can't find FLTK
I've been spending the last few days packaging up my pet project. I finally submitted it to the mentors website last night, but I'm aware of one problem building it, that I'm hoping someone knows how to solve. In one sentence, like the subject says: When building in pbuilder, CMake can't find FLTK. It isn't a problem on any of the other systems I support; various ubuntu flavors. Debian lenny, squeeze or sid, either on metal or in VMs. Opensolaris. Arch Linux. OSX. MinGW/MSYS. I've run it on armv5, amd64, x86, sparc, ppc [not that architecture usually has any bearing on build systems, but still...] - somehow, it only occurs at the intersection of pbuilder and sid. I have a complete buildlog here: http://icculus.org/~chunky/stuff/buildlog.txt Note that cmake, libfltk1.1-dev, fluid, pkg-config are all pulled in. But down in the cmake run, I see this line: -- Could NOT find FLTK (missing: FLTK_INCLUDE_DIR) I found someone online who has what sounds like a similar problem: http://groups.google.com/group/linux.debian.bugs.dist/browse_thread/thread/b85232f8026ed347/dea38cd2422a846f?lnk=raotpli=1 I've used exactly that fix for past projects [setting FLTK_INCLUDE_DIR manually-ish], but that doesn't seem to fix it for me; neither when I put it in CMakeLists.txt [as they do], nor when I set it on the command-line [using dh_autoconfigure override, pass -DFLTK_INCLUDE_DIR=/usr/include to cmake]. My project's svn is here [the debian packaging is in trunk]: svn co svn://svn.icculus.org/obdgpslogger/trunk obdgpslogger-0.14 If anyone has any deep thoughts or otherwise general mentor-ish pearls of wisdom, I'm very open to suggestion Thank-you very much, Gary (-; -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100505055311.gh11...@gamehenge.icculus.org
Re: Specifying %{variable} in control file for use in postinst?
Thomas Goirand tho...@goirand.fr writes: - Original message - We were talking about dpkg-parsechangelog. MfG Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Goswin Are you saying that dpkg-parsechangelog must also be available in RedHat like distros? Sorry, I didn't get it, but now I think you are quite right. Thomas I don't see any reason why a package could not do the srpm equivalent of Build-Depends: dpkg-dev and use dpkg-parsechangelog. Srpm does have Build-Depends, right? MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r5lqbvse@frosties.localdomain
Re: dpkg-shlibdeps: not finding just build libraries
Hector Oron hector.o...@gmail.com writes: Hello, I am trying to build a package (binutils for cross targets) which now also builds a shared library (libbfd) which fullfills the dependency of some binaries just built (objdump; objcopy). The upstream code builds fine, but, when I trigger dh_shlibdeps [...] How does the dh_makeshlibs call look like? And what do the shlibs files it generates look like? dh_installdeb -s LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib/libfakeroot:/usr/lib64/libfakeroot:/usr/lib32/libfakeroot:/usr/arm-linux-gnueabi/lib dh_shlibdeps -s dpkg-shlibdeps: error: couldn't find library libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so needed by debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-objcopy (ELF format: 'elf32-i386'; RPATH: '/usr/arm-linux-gnueabi/i486-linux-gnu/arm-linux-gnueabi/lib'). Note: libraries are not searched in other binary packages that do not have any shlibs or symbols file. To help dpkg-shlibdeps find private libraries, you might need to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH. dh_shlibdeps: dpkg-shlibdeps -Tdebian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi.substvars debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-strip debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-strings debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-objdump debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-nm debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-addr2line debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gprof debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-objcopy debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-readelf debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-as debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-size debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-ar debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-ld debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-c++filt debian/binutils-arm-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-ranlib returned exit code 2 make: *** [binary-arch] Error 9 dpkg-buildpackage: error: fakeroot debian/rules binary gave error exit status 2 Those missing libs are just build under: $ ls -l install/binutils/usr/arm-linux-gnueabi/i486-linux-gnu/arm-linux-gnueabi/lib/ total 7896 -rwxr-xr-x 1 zumbi zumbi 2502645 may 4 16:14 libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so -rw-r--r-- 1 zumbi zumbi 4788842 may 4 16:14 libbfd.a -rwxr-xr-x 1 zumbi zumbi1095 may 4 16:14 libbfd.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 zumbi zumbi 25 may 4 16:14 libbfd.so - libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 zumbi zumbi 287677 may 4 16:14 libopcodes-2.20.1.20100303.so -rw-r--r-- 1 zumbi zumbi 464144 may 4 16:14 libopcodes.a -rwxr-xr-x 1 zumbi zumbi1118 may 4 16:14 libopcodes.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 zumbi zumbi 29 may 4 16:14 libopcodes.so - libopcodes-2.20.1.20100303.so That directory is not searched by dpkg-shlibdeps. You should have a debain/package/DEBIAN/shlibs debian/ypackage/usr/arm-linux-gnueabi/i486-linux-gnu/arm-linux-gnueabi/lib/libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so The first tells dpkg-shlibdeps to search that package and the later is where the RPATH makes it look. Those missing libraries (I expect) are also found at binutils-dev | binutils-multiarch $ dpkg -S libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so dpkg: *libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so* not found. So you don't have an matching lib installed. But even if you had that would be the wrong one. Other than as reference what libs should be in the cross package looking at the installed debs is quite useless. The cross binutils should not depend on the normal binutils I think. $ dpkg -L binutils-dev [...] /usr/lib/libbfd.a desviado por binutils-multiarch a: /usr/lib/libbfd-single.a /usr/lib/libopcodes.a desviado por binutils-multiarch a: /usr/lib/libopcodes-single.a /usr/lib/libopcodes.so /usr/lib/libbfd.so $ dpkg -L binutils-multiarch [...] /usr/lib/libopcodes-2.20.1-multiarch.20100303.so /usr/lib/libbfd-2.20.1-multiarch.20100303.so OK, now, how should I proceed if I want to use just build libbfd-2.20.1.20100303.so? Should I best use libbfd-2.20.1-multiarch.20100303.so provided by binutils-multiarch package? How do I instruct dh_shlibdeps to find the just build library or the other one? Kind regards, First thing to check is that you actualy do have the library in some package and the right shlibs information. You should not be using the system libraries as you need the shlibs information of the library you just compiled. Using the systems shlibs file could give you wrong information and also the wrong package. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxwebuwa@frosties.localdomain
Re: Which how to for apt-get repository on CentOS?
Russ Allbery r...@debian.org writes: Ignacio Valdes ival...@hal-pc.org writes: Hi all, Building an apt-get repository on CentOS. There seems to be many documents on apt-get repository building but they point to many different commands like apparently deprecated dpkg-scanfiles, reprepro and others. Which one is the correct one? -- IV I recommend starting with reprepro. The documentation isn't ideal and it can be confusing, but it does everything as opposed to requiring you to stitch together a bunch of separate commands and it's fully capable of anything you might need. There are some other, simpler ones tha I forget off-hand that might be better for smaller repositories (reprepro does have the problem of having a lot of reprepro make-angels-dance-on-pin sorts of commands where it's very inobvious when you want to ever run them), but I think reprepro is the current fully-functional standard for repository management software. I concurr with that recommendation of reprepro. If you follow /usr/share/doc/reprepro/short-howto.gz then you can be up and running in a few minutes. Learning about all the features takes longer though. I think reprepro is just the simplest all around for creating a repository. dpkg-scanpackages/sources can also be used but that only generated the Packages/Sources files. It does not generate Release or Release.gpg files or manage the debs or sources in any way. So to use that you need a lot of extra scripts around it. The official Debian archive uses apt-ftparchive but again you need scripts around that for a fully functional repository. Then there is also debpool and mini-dinstall. Both are targeted specifically for small private repositories with minimal dependcies. The full DAK Debian uses needs a postgresql database for example. Not these tools (reprepro used libdb-4.8.so, not postgresql). But I believe both debpool and mini-dinstall are limited by the archive size. Another reason why I also recommend reprepro is that it can also mirror (multiple) repositories and filter them. It is easy to set up reprepro to mirror debian main, contrib and non-free and add an extra local branch for packages you compile yourself. You can also snapshot your repository, e.g. to make a release of what is currently there. Or query what sources need building for some arch and run a buildd. Lots of nice features that are easy to use and might come in handy in the future. All with being small and easy to get started. MfG Goswin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87iq72btz8@frosties.localdomain
Sizin için seçtik
BODY {
MARGIN: 0px
}
Sizin İçin Özel
Odamdaki Gökkuşağı
69.90
TL
Işıklı Kaplumbağa
59.90
TL
Dört Taraflı Saat
9.99
TL
Poşet Taşıma Aparatı
5.90
TL
İlkbahar Kablo Klipsleri
12.90
TL
Zincir Şişe Tutacağı
49.90
TL
Türkiyenin En Tuhaf Sanal Marketi © Copyright
2010
Baran Elektronik Ticaret - Her Hakkı
Saklıdır.
Listemizden çıkmak istiyorsanız
e-postayı yanıtlayınız.
Re: Specifying %{variable} in control file for use in postinst?
Goswin von Brederlow wrote: Thomas Goirand tho...@goirand.fr writes: Srpm does have Build-Depends, right? MfG Goswin Sure! It's called BuildRequires: in the spec files. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4be14a81.2000...@goirand.fr
RFS: morse (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.1-4 of my package morse. It builds these binary packages: morse - 'Morse Classic' is a morse-code training program for aspiring rad The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 553991 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/morse - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/morse/morse_2.1-4.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Nanakos Chrysostomos -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJL4UvqAAoJEIc96jCdE4B/JyMP/0O3q0WGTNWrzLgMqdsW1pje HCVW9B4n51WBeSltt4ARXn1zHJuhCWqh16pA115LpKafBQ0bC4Xal07r03NpCp0L xrOTULdBbugJN2qDkvMAucjdF51b6MNOSEFnPe84SLPOo2+A4gZf9WwQee9FRvRL NCXgrwj9axst6Ftsj2p++bBwOEZR39WXegXbOJyj5b/MkVUzbSs0UIG9yQyvr5lg wG2DF7XQYOF54OG4OAoNc/VHZYz2OY41Zfog7rbKJppnf1Sf53uxNqrH+SINxDl8 gkRvERGsd2bZdetZ6OJ/6f3M/GN4hRzKwbYCmRPYM46l/u1DrfIr3PPjfuw4nlCt uGcpZWNHXeygq698jF2eVtF2U2fGPbUehYHJ+iY9ryp3eGNo/88MF2/f/FOpOcXu ulveldK3u2wfdsIHKpRyPETHyfnRyxrCHXCtp/Br95AT+8yfqTxAZtuPD27V7Ttt X5lUcinKyOCa2BeWGCIjfMWA3htUcDY5+xH1tLGUyWjSC6W7csRDWTQTx2LnfDZW hyy6HMuBUPc8bkqSand8C+8Jgl8spG1/JJKh4JeaPtVJLP+u6SwFx7yNnjXgeqTB 17RwFt11np9RlHiwHI+z6kzNH4LLDiNlb7Yen7iSRl9rHLGa1WVoMylRCRbIwKS6 +eeD944cFlB0w8fvMg4Y =qwyN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4be14bea.3060...@wired-net.gr
RFS: xlog (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 2.0.3-3 of my package xlog. It builds these binary packages: xlog - GTK+ Logging program for Hamradio Operators xlog-data - data for xlog, a GTK+ Logging program for Hamradio Operators The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 544318, 555143 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xlog - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/x/xlog/xlog_2.0.3-3.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Nanakos Chrysostomos -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJL4UlRAAoJEIc96jCdE4B/IhsQAJ5qcGYndsrvB3y3ojTQq0oA qVXaMF8S03lyE8eSgqjz294Btyezf/JSmMfqR4/kPECwF6vGXNoBLkNweSFfTLwL HmBT446SO/aHYjnglG1D+BpizHJTwCC7j40ZS4iljZBh0q6j613X8LP9dcXMxGTa m2MDeNaMy9pwUTyNAQcGRrN1ODWBHpO9bQK3PCXRZxToyFeraUH5kTVv1wB/ERWE 9McudMIdineoL/RvYitQnfV/VLIicpzfB5DX96Yzxv0Ee/OBEE2tUWK80yq3HnRJ /yQBYrpE3oSlyIZeUgwrTy4iRQgSqINThN70sH6Vi5frtpCV9wIuZThEiTCwe0Ym uD12AI+5EZDWNrIAvtKxUl+c0ewg65V0EmBi7Rapjm3j5xYW/FUTN9afKFGe+gVn EfJISAtkzpIIxD0RuduItjtidKpGXq7XaF08t3NltaLNnU/IwLftq+1XmGPqV13K 5gvBcKOKofbB/GnQagaTpQY8MoUUi07PBChU9ctoyyazC3uagTi/QKfYFWllLdhv Zod0A31CSBTrmrmBS0ypMjm5yi2+mZMy6UNKkHDNcIZY3N730QkEtNwTv3ZuFQoe 8gEM5Ca+BqnrllF2o3in5kw6hQmCnpIak4kGhm1ZEmTvBB8jpVFPnmWGWUYGyOhN 2YjAFBU7WEL82wfE/4zU =p2Y6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4be14951.3000...@wired-net.gr
Re: Which how to for apt-get repository on CentOS?
On Tuesday 04 May 2010 23:18:13 Ignacio Valdes wrote: Hi all, Building an apt-get repository on CentOS. There seems to be many documents on apt-get repository building but they point to many different commands like apparently deprecated dpkg-scanfiles, reprepro and others. Which one is the correct one? -- IV For a simple repository, I used apt-ftparchive. If you are going to have multiple releases (e.g. lenny, sid), multiple sections (e.g. main, non-free), or a package pool, then it might be too simple a tool, however. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. b...@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Which how to for apt-get repository on CentOS?
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: On Tuesday 04 May 2010 23:18:13 Ignacio Valdes wrote: Hi all, Building an apt-get repository on CentOS. There seems to be many documents on apt-get repository building but they point to many different commands like apparently deprecated dpkg-scanfiles, reprepro and others. Which one is the correct one? -- IV We've been using this small script, that manages both our CentOS and Debian repo: http://git.gplhost.com/gitweb/?p=mgmt-scripts.git;a=blob;f=scripts/scan_archive;h=db7647732b989b35ae7d8a48c80a48ecf67e4612;hb=ecc8972e2e2537387d3707cd73aa84625393836d Just run the script each time you add a new file in /home/ftp/debian/pool/$release It's very basic, but we don't feel we need more. It has been inspired by various tutorials. Note that of course, you need to have a pgp key generated for the user using the script, so you can sign your release file. I hope that helps, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4be1a129.2080...@goirand.fr
RFS: roxterm (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.18.2-1 of my package roxterm. It builds these binary packages: roxterm- Multi-tabbed GTK/VTE terminal emulator The package appears to be lintian clean. It fixes these upstream bugs: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=2996294group_id=124080atid=698428 https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=2996296group_id=124080atid=698428 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/r/roxterm/roxterm_1.18.2-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Tony Houghton -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100505212202.440ea...@toddler
RFS: nsis-2.46-2 [attn: pabs]
Hi, I'd like to update the NSIS Debian package to version 2.46-2. NSIS is an open source system to create Windows installers and it is licensed under the zlib/libpng license. The maintenance of the NSIS Debian package is handled via the collab-maint subversion repository: svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/collab-maint/ext-maint/nsis/trunk respectively http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/collab-maint/ext-maint/nsis/trunk/?op=3Dlog I would propose the lastest revision (rev 16086) for upload. This revision includes the following changes: * Updated zlib patch with changes from upstream subversion repository * Made embedded inflate function compatible with zlib (Closes: #579407) * Exclude unneeded win32-only utilities from building * Build makensis and portable utilities natively for amd64 I verified with pbuilder that all required build dependencies are listed in the debian/control file. Lintian reports the following known warnings for the NSIS Debian package: W: nsis: non-standard-dir-in-usr usr/i586-mingw32msvc/ W: nsis: file-in-unusual-dir usr/i586-mingw32msvc/include/nsis/api.h W: nsis: file-in-unusual-dir usr/i586-mingw32msvc/include/nsis/pluginapi.h W: nsis: file-in-unusual-dir usr/i586-mingw32msvc/lib/nsis/libpluginapi.a N: 1 tag overridden (1 warning) I built the test installers via fakeroot debian/rules override_dh_auto_test and zipped the resulting executables placed in the .test directory. Thereafter I unzipped the test installers and run them on a Windows machine. The tests didn't show neither any regression nor misbehavior. Please let me know if I missed anything preventing the upload of this package. Thanks in advance, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100505231117.081b1...@appletv.dadie.com
