Re: Qt packaging
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 11:03:54AM +0200, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? Beside build time and space requirements, I see one more reason now: rebuilding after dependent package soname change is more painful. Current case: jasper 3.x. Split case: just qt5-qtimageformats.spec to rebuild Monolithic case: whole qt6.spec to rebuild -- Jakub Boguszhttp://qboosh.pl/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: DISTFILES: qt6: ERRORS: qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz
On 30.10.2022 18:08, Jan Palus wrote: On 24.10.2022 09:17, Jan Palus wrote: On 24.10.2022 09:13, atler wrote: Request by: atler wget -nv --no-iri --user-agent=PLD/distfiles -O ./tmp/c988e5de-3fbe-4f8d-9c0e-892a6cc71ea2/bc928a9897698ec397b11c3dbff40e53/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz https://download.qt.io/official_releases/qt/6.3/6.3.2/single/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz: Cannot write to ???./tmp/c988e5de-3fbe-4f8d-9c0e-892a6cc71ea2/bc928a9897698ec397b11c3dbff40e53/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz??? (Success). Can someone have a look what's that about? Noticed it before for larger sources like firefox but usually retry succeeded. qt6 on the other hand fails consistently. Also fails with `dropin` script after transferring ~264M: firefox-106.0.2.source.tar.xz54% 264MB 5.1MB/s 00:42 ETA scp: write remote "./firefox-106.0.2.source.tar.xz": Failure scp: failed to upload file firefox-106.0.2.source.tar.xz to . dropin is on cvs and there was no free space there. Added some. -- Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org ) ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: DISTFILES: qt6: ERRORS: qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz
On 24.10.2022 09:17, Jan Palus wrote: > On 24.10.2022 09:13, atler wrote: > > Request by: atler > > > > wget -nv --no-iri --user-agent=PLD/distfiles -O > > ./tmp/c988e5de-3fbe-4f8d-9c0e-892a6cc71ea2/bc928a9897698ec397b11c3dbff40e53/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz > > > > https://download.qt.io/official_releases/qt/6.3/6.3.2/single/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz: > > Cannot write to > > ???./tmp/c988e5de-3fbe-4f8d-9c0e-892a6cc71ea2/bc928a9897698ec397b11c3dbff40e53/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz??? > > (Success). > > Can someone have a look what's that about? Noticed it before for larger > sources like firefox but usually retry succeeded. qt6 on the other hand > fails consistently. Also fails with `dropin` script after transferring ~264M: firefox-106.0.2.source.tar.xz54% 264MB 5.1MB/s 00:42 ETA scp: write remote "./firefox-106.0.2.source.tar.xz": Failure scp: failed to upload file firefox-106.0.2.source.tar.xz to . ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: DISTFILES: qt6: ERRORS: qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz
On 24.10.2022 09:13, atler wrote: > Request by: atler > > wget -nv --no-iri --user-agent=PLD/distfiles -O > ./tmp/c988e5de-3fbe-4f8d-9c0e-892a6cc71ea2/bc928a9897698ec397b11c3dbff40e53/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz > > https://download.qt.io/official_releases/qt/6.3/6.3.2/single/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz: > Cannot write to > ???./tmp/c988e5de-3fbe-4f8d-9c0e-892a6cc71ea2/bc928a9897698ec397b11c3dbff40e53/qt-everywhere-src-6.3.2.tar.xz??? > (Success). Can someone have a look what's that about? Noticed it before for larger sources like firefox but usually retry succeeded. qt6 on the other hand fails consistently. ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On 08.08.2022 23:34, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > On Mon, 08 Aug 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > > > On 08.08.2022 08:32, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > > > > > > > On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > > > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > > > > > > > > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s > > > > > much > > > > > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > > > > > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > > > > > > > > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm > > > > > just going > > > > > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still > > > > > subpackage > > > > > bineries as we want them). > > > > > > > > As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact > > > > release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all > > > > the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging > > > > adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared > > > > about my use case. > > > > > > FYI build time on builders is 1.5 hour without qtwebengine and 7 hours > > > with qtwebengine. > > > > > > I don't know how it looks on arm, but IMHO no-webengine bcond should be > > > enough? > > > > Multiply it by ~4 and it's roughly result for arm. The first part I > > mean, qtwebengine is so heavy that I build it in AWS. > > > > Anyway no worries, if needed I can add more bconds myself. And thanks a > > lot for working on qt6! > > Thanks, it's a slow and painful process, and we'll end up with less > granularity, at least at the beginning. What I want now, is a MVP to be able > to build current calibre :/ > > Out of curiosity, would webengine even build on arm? What I see it > building is full blown blink/chromium engine. And this thing has lots > of fancy dependencies, both software and hardware. Just to be clear when I said "arm" I really meant "aarch64", 32-bit version of qtwebengine is of not much interest to me. And at least qtwebengine 5.x builds just fine for aarch64 and using it daily as my primary web browsing engine. I don't expect qt6 to be much different but haven't tried to build it so far. ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On Mon, 08 Aug 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > On 08.08.2022 08:32, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > > > > > On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > > > > > > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much > > > > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > > > > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > > > > > > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just > > > > going > > > > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still > > > > subpackage > > > > bineries as we want them). > > > > > > As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact > > > release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all > > > the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging > > > adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared > > > about my use case. > > > > FYI build time on builders is 1.5 hour without qtwebengine and 7 hours > > with qtwebengine. > > > > I don't know how it looks on arm, but IMHO no-webengine bcond should be > > enough? > > Multiply it by ~4 and it's roughly result for arm. The first part I > mean, qtwebengine is so heavy that I build it in AWS. > > Anyway no worries, if needed I can add more bconds myself. And thanks a > lot for working on qt6! Thanks, it's a slow and painful process, and we'll end up with less granularity, at least at the beginning. What I want now, is a MVP to be able to build current calibre :/ Out of curiosity, would webengine even build on arm? What I see it building is full blown blink/chromium engine. And this thing has lots of fancy dependencies, both software and hardware. -- Jan Rękorajski| PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On 08.08.2022 08:32, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > > > On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > > > > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much > > > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > > > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > > > > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just > > > going > > > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still > > > subpackage > > > bineries as we want them). > > > > As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact > > release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all > > the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging > > adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared > > about my use case. > > FYI build time on builders is 1.5 hour without qtwebengine and 7 hours > with qtwebengine. > > I don't know how it looks on arm, but IMHO no-webengine bcond should be > enough? Multiply it by ~4 and it's roughly result for arm. The first part I mean, qtwebengine is so heavy that I build it in AWS. Anyway no worries, if needed I can add more bconds myself. And thanks a lot for working on qt6! ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On Mon, 08 Aug 2022, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 2:32 AM Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > > > > > On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > > > > > > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much > > > > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > > > > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > > > > > > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just > > > > going > > > > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still > > > > subpackage > > > > bineries as we want them). > > > > > > As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact > > > release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all > > > the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging > > > adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared > > > about my use case. > > > > FYI build time on builders is 1.5 hour without qtwebengine and 7 hours > > with qtwebengine. > > > > I don't know how it looks on arm, but IMHO no-webengine bcond should be > > enough? > > > > The reason most distros don't use the monolithic source is that it's a > pain to apply patches to it. Qt doesn't actually get developed that > way, and backporting fixes is more of a pain if you use the monolithic > build. Well, we don't have resources to play with backporting changes. Besides I saw have ex. Fedora packages qt and it is IMO a joke. They don't build docs, they don't build internal deps, so yeah, it's easy, but it's half of the functionality. I'd rather have a package without the backports, but with all bells and whistles, that is easy to build, rather than either build pain on half baked. -- Jan Rękorajski| PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 2:32 AM Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > > > On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > > > > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much > > > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > > > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > > > > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just > > > going > > > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still > > > subpackage > > > bineries as we want them). > > > > As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact > > release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all > > the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging > > adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared > > about my use case. > > FYI build time on builders is 1.5 hour without qtwebengine and 7 hours > with qtwebengine. > > I don't know how it looks on arm, but IMHO no-webengine bcond should be > enough? > The reason most distros don't use the monolithic source is that it's a pain to apply patches to it. Qt doesn't actually get developed that way, and backporting fixes is more of a pain if you use the monolithic build. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022, Jan Palus wrote: > On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much > > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just going > > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still subpackage > > bineries as we want them). > > As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact > release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all > the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging > adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared > about my use case. FYI build time on builders is 1.5 hour without qtwebengine and 7 hours with qtwebengine. I don't know how it looks on arm, but IMHO no-webengine bcond should be enough? -- Jan Rękorajski| PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt packaging
On 22.07.2022 11:03, Jan Rękorajski wrote: > Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? > > I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much > easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just > configure -> build -> build docs -> install. > > And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just going > to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still subpackage > bineries as we want them). As long as each component is bcondized and there are no "to the exact release" dependencies then I guess it's fine. Doing qtwebengine (and all the other components) rebuild each time qtbase needs a small packaging adjustment would be tough on arm, though I'd understand if nobody cared about my use case. ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Qt packaging
Can someone explain why are we using split sources/packages for Qt? I want to add Qt6 and building from the monolythic source is s much easier. No need for bootstrap, no intertwined build dependencies, just configure -> build -> build docs -> install. And unless there is a _very_ good reason to use split sources I'm just going to add a single qt6 package that builds everything (we can still subpackage bineries as we want them). -- Jan Rękorajski| PLD/Linux SysAdm | bagginspld-linux.org | http://www.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: [packages/transmission] add gtk and qt bconds
On 12/6/20 12:58 AM, atler wrote:
+%files %{?with_gtk:-f %{name}.lang}
wouldn't it make sense to move the language files to gtk subpackage then?
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: qt-examples
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: hi qt(4)-examples to be noarch? i.e remove binary components from there (.o, .obj) remove generated Makefile and .prl there's also compiled programs, maybe these should go to -examples-progs? opinions? Good idea, and, yes if we really want to keep compiled programs then they should go to separate package. -- Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/ bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl bagginsatpld-linux.org ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
qt-examples
hi qt(4)-examples to be noarch? i.e remove binary components from there (.o, .obj) remove generated Makefile and .prl there's also compiled programs, maybe these should go to -examples-progs? opinions? -- glen qtdiff.diff.xz Description: application/xz ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Oct 2, 2012, at 1:10 PM, Jan Rękorajski bagg...@pld-linux.org wrote: On Tue, 02 Oct 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: Then examine all the data that is in the rpm header, looking for a file digest that has an odd (as in 1, 3, 5, …) no. of hex digits in the string. If the assert failure is happening only sometimes, then the root cause, not just the assert failure symptom, needs to be identified. WYSIWYG rpm -qp --yaml foo*.rpm Diff between package built with rpm-4.5 and rpm5: --- QtXmlPatterns-4.8.2-8.x86_64.rpm.yaml 2012-10-02 18:58:09.785203104 +0200 +++ QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6.x86_64.rpm.yaml 2012-10-02 18:58:09.805203104 +0200 @@ -53,14 +69,14 @@ Filedigests: - ~ - ~ - ~ -- ca8235752f514d51cf0ffeb9e341ec9d -- b35726f465b533a4406165d9e524d5bf -- 829fb2332a1dd35094a626c5610f3f74 +- 46b61400c99701b4c11d11d910e028bbdator +- 53d8d681212d8e71bba13fe28b7a6faadator +- f5ca838ce74266d1803ee0659572e884dator Filelinktos: - ../lib64/qt4/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator -- libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8.2 -- libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8.2 +- libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8.3 +- libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8.3 - ~ - ~ - ~ Looks like buffer error. Looks like a missing \0 being added on some (but not all) code paths. Running valgrind is worth doing to see if there is anything wildly amiss: but I don't expect valgrind to be able to spot the missing \0 because of buffer reuse on the stack. There's something screwy on this package that is triggering the flaw (or all packages would be affected equally). Can you spot the root cause in the QtXmlPatterns.spec syntax? If I have some hint what the trigger is, I can likely find/fix the problem very quickly. What solution is possible if no code can be changed? Dropping the Filedigests index is a C-O-N-F-I-G-U-R-A-T-I-O-N change btw. The solution is to fix the buffer error which effects can be seen above. Absolutely: meanwhile the assert failure can be avoided by not generating the Filedigests index. BTW what's going on with rpm5.org? I can't connect to it from anywhere. Yep @rpm5.org http is busted atm, maybe forever. Awww :( What is the current place of rpm5 now in that case? Same place as always, just busted (and I have other more important tasks to accomplish) atm. 73 de Jeff -- Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/ bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl bagginsatpld-linux.org ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Oct 2, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Jan Rękorajski bagg...@pld-linux.org wrote:
That package is built from the, quite large, qt4.spec so it's hard to
spot anything there :(
Yes. I needed some understanding why some but not all packages are affected.
Maybe %files will give a hint?
Yes. I predict that if you move
%attr(755,root,root) %{_qtdir}/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator
to the end of %files, then the problem will disappear.
A real fix is needed still: but its useful to know whether
the problem is dependent on path order in %files.
%define _qtdir %{_libdir}/qt4
%files -n QtXmlPatterns
%defattr(644,root,root,755)
%attr(755,root,root) %{_qtdir}/bin/xmlpatterns
%attr(755,root,root) %{_qtdir}/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator
%attr(755,root,root) %{_bindir}/xmlpatternsvalidator
%attr(755,root,root) %{_libdir}/libQtXmlPatterns.so.*.*
%attr(755,root,root) %ghost %{_libdir}/libQtXmlPatterns.so.4
hth
73 de Jeff
--
Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux
SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/
bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl
bagginsatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Tue, 02 Oct 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
On Oct 2, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Jan Rękorajski bagg...@pld-linux.org wrote:
That package is built from the, quite large, qt4.spec so it's hard to
spot anything there :(
Yes. I needed some understanding why some but not all packages are affected.
Maybe %files will give a hint?
Yes. I predict that if you move
%attr(755,root,root) %{_qtdir}/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator
to the end of %files, then the problem will disappear.
Just FYI - moving that to the end of %files did not helped at all.
I still see poisoned digests.
--
Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux
SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/
bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl
bagginsatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Tue, 02 Oct 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
On Oct 2, 2012, at 3:37 PM, Jan Rękorajski bagg...@pld-linux.org wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
On Oct 2, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Jan Rękorajski bagg...@pld-linux.org wrote:
That package is built from the, quite large, qt4.spec so it's hard to
spot anything there :(
Yes. I needed some understanding why some but not all packages are
affected.
Maybe %files will give a hint?
Yes. I predict that if you move
%attr(755,root,root) %{_qtdir}/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator
to the end of %files, then the problem will disappear.
Just FYI - moving that to the end of %files did not helped at all.
I still see poisoned digests.
Thanks for checking.
This patch SHOULD ensure ascii digest are terminated with a trailing \0
Confirmed, works as expected.
Is something else needed for the missing symlink end-point entry?
Nothing that I'm aware of.
--
Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux
SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/
bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl
bagginsatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: On Sep 30, 2012, at 6:08 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: decided to write, as mmazur said in irc that for him crash occoured also in Qt upgrade my random guess is that rpm45 does not like something that rpm5 put into .rpm package, as haven't seen rpm45 crashing for a long time. As good a gas as any: wanna bet? ;-) Show me -v -v output and I can likely guess what the problem is. Here you go: D: == +++ QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6 x86_64-linux 0x2 D: Expected size: 1027293 = lead(96)+sigs(268)+pad(4)+data(1026925) D: Actual size: 1027293 D: QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6: Header V4 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID e4f1bc2d D: install: QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6 has 6 files, test = 0 6:QtXmlPatterns D: == Directories not explicitly included in package: D: 0 /usr/bin/ D: 1 /usr/lib64/ D: 2 /usr/lib64/qt4/bin/ D: == D: fini 120755 1 ( 0, 0) 37 /usr/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator;5049aab4 D: fini 120755 1 ( 0, 0) 25 /usr/lib64/libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8;5049aab4 D: fini 100755 1 ( 0, 0) 4448144 /usr/lib64/libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8.3;5049aab4 ### [100%] D: fini 100755 1 ( 0, 0) 65424 /usr/lib64/qt4/bin/xmlpatterns;5049aab4 D: fini 100755 1 ( 0, 0) 12000 /usr/lib64/qt4/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator;5049aab4 LZDIO: 553 reads, 4526496 total bytes in 0.094108 secs D: +++ /var/cache/hrmib/QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6.x86_64 D: +++ h#1751 Header V4 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID e4f1bc2d D: adding QtXmlPatterns to Name index. D: adding 6 entries to Basenames index. D: adding X11/Libraries to Group index. D: adding 20 entries to Requirename index. D: adding 5 entries to Providename index. D: adding 3 entries to Dirnames index. D: adding 20 entries to Requireversion index. D: adding 5 entries to Provideversion index. D: adding 1 entries to Installtid index. D: adding 1 entries to Sigmd5 index. D: adding c16b5e5e3d026f4d5a8628ffcbf09f094ef22f4d to Sha1header index. rpm: rpmdb.c:3429: rpmdbAdd: Assertion `(dlen 1) == 0' failed. -- Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/ bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl bagginsatpld-linux.org ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Oct 1, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
On Sep 30, 2012, at 6:08 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
decided to write, as mmazur said in irc that for him crash occoured also in
Qt upgrade
my random guess is that rpm45 does not like something that rpm5 put into
.rpm package,
as haven't seen rpm45 crashing for a long time.
As good a gas as any: wanna bet? ;-)
Show me -v -v output and I can likely guess what the problem is.
Here you go:
D: == +++ QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6 x86_64-linux 0x2
D: Expected size: 1027293 = lead(96)+sigs(268)+pad(4)+data(1026925)
D: Actual size: 1027293
D: QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6: Header V4 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID e4f1bc2d
D: install: QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6 has 6 files, test = 0
6:QtXmlPatterns
D: == Directories not explicitly included in package:
D: 0 /usr/bin/
D: 1 /usr/lib64/
D: 2 /usr/lib64/qt4/bin/
D: ==
D: fini 120755 1 ( 0, 0) 37
/usr/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator;5049aab4
D: fini 120755 1 ( 0, 0) 25
/usr/lib64/libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8;5049aab4
D: fini 100755 1 ( 0, 0) 4448144
/usr/lib64/libQtXmlPatterns.so.4.8.3;5049aab4
### [100%]
D: fini 100755 1 ( 0, 0) 65424
/usr/lib64/qt4/bin/xmlpatterns;5049aab4
D: fini 100755 1 ( 0, 0) 12000
/usr/lib64/qt4/bin/xmlpatternsvalidator;5049aab4
LZDIO: 553 reads, 4526496 total bytes in 0.094108 secs
D: +++ /var/cache/hrmib/QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6.x86_64
D: +++ h#1751 Header V4 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID e4f1bc2d
D: adding QtXmlPatterns to Name index.
D: adding 6 entries to Basenames index.
D: adding X11/Libraries to Group index.
D: adding 20 entries to Requirename index.
D: adding 5 entries to Providename index.
D: adding 3 entries to Dirnames index.
D: adding 20 entries to Requireversion index.
D: adding 5 entries to Provideversion index.
D: adding 1 entries to Installtid index.
D: adding 1 entries to Sigmd5 index.
D: adding c16b5e5e3d026f4d5a8628ffcbf09f094ef22f4d to Sha1header index.
rpm: rpmdb.c:3429: rpmdbAdd: Assertion `(dlen 1) == 0' failed.
OK.
Here is the code containing the assertion failure (in rpm-4.5, 2 occurrences):
if (dbi-dbi_rpmtag == RPMTAG_FILEDIGESTS) {
const char * s = rpmvals[i];
size_t dlen = strlen(s);
byte * t;
assert((dlen 1) == 0);
dlen /= 2;
bin = t = xcalloc(1, dlen);
for (j = 0; j dlen; j++, t++, s += 2)
*t = (nibble(s[0]) 4) | nibble(s[1]);
key-data = bin;
key-size = dlen;
/*@switchbreak@*/ break;
}
The assertion is a sanity check on the number of hex digits in
RPMTAG_FILEDIGESTS
strings (which will always be even).
What digest is in use for file content? The digest algorithm is configurable
in rpm-5.x, and
is more likely to be SHA256/SHA1 than MD5 these days.
73 de Jeff
--
Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux
SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/
bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl
bagginsatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Oct 1, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
The assertion is a sanity check on the number of hex digits in
RPMTAG_FILEDIGESTS
strings (which will always be even).
What digest is in use for file content? The digest algorithm is configurable
in rpm-5.x, and
is more likely to be SHA256/SHA1 than MD5 these days.
The simplest legacy compatible fix is to drop the Filedigests index.
You will lose the ability to query by fileid (which I doubt you will miss).
(untested patch against cvs, not PLD rpm-4.5)
Index: macros.in
===
RCS file: /v/rpm/cvs/rpm/Attic/macros.in,v
retrieving revision 1.159.2.14
diff -p -u -w -r1.159.2.14 macros.in
--- macros.in 19 Mar 2009 01:04:41 - 1.159.2.14
+++ macros.in 1 Oct 2012 18:39:07 -
@@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ print (t)\
%{!?_rpmdb_rebuild:%{__dbi_btconfig_current}}\
%{nil}
-%_dbi_tags
Packages:Name:Basenames:Group:Requirename:Providename:Conflictname:Triggername:Dirnames:Requireversion:Provideversion:Installtid:Sigmd5:Sha1header:Filemd5s:Depends:Pubkeys
+%_dbi_tags
Packages:Name:Basenames:Group:Requirename:Providename:Conflictname:Triggername:Dirnames:Requireversion:Provideversion:Installtid:Sigmd5:Sha1header:Depends:Pubkeys
%_dbi_config_Dirnames %{_dbi_btconfig}
%_dbi_config_Requireversion%{_dbi_btconfig}
hth
73 de Jeff
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Mon, 01 Oct 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
On Oct 1, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Jan Rękorajski wrote:
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012, Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
On Sep 30, 2012, at 6:08 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
decided to write, as mmazur said in irc that for him crash occoured also
in Qt upgrade
my random guess is that rpm45 does not like something that rpm5 put into
.rpm package,
as haven't seen rpm45 crashing for a long time.
As good a gas as any: wanna bet? ;-)
Show me -v -v output and I can likely guess what the problem is.
Here you go:
D: == +++ QtXmlPatterns-4.8.3-6 x86_64-linux 0x2
[...]
D: adding c16b5e5e3d026f4d5a8628ffcbf09f094ef22f4d to Sha1header index.
rpm: rpmdb.c:3429: rpmdbAdd: Assertion `(dlen 1) == 0' failed.
OK.
Here is the code containing the assertion failure (in rpm-4.5, 2 occurrences):
if (dbi-dbi_rpmtag == RPMTAG_FILEDIGESTS) {
const char * s = rpmvals[i];
size_t dlen = strlen(s);
byte * t;
assert((dlen 1) == 0);
dlen /= 2;
bin = t = xcalloc(1, dlen);
for (j = 0; j dlen; j++, t++, s += 2)
*t = (nibble(s[0]) 4) | nibble(s[1]);
key-data = bin;
key-size = dlen;
/*@switchbreak@*/ break;
}
The assertion is a sanity check on the number of hex digits in
RPMTAG_FILEDIGESTS
strings (which will always be even).
What digest is in use for file content? The digest algorithm is configurable
in rpm-5.x, and
is more likely to be SHA256/SHA1 than MD5 these days.
Both rpm 4.5 and now rpm 5.4 use MD5 as file digest algo.
And ripping out filemd5 index is quite pointless, as the problem is the
inability to install package build with rpm5 on a system with rpm 4.5,
so the real fix is upgrade to rpm5. But it would be good to know what
is the cause of that bug to not break things before upgrade.
--
Jan Rękorajski | PLD/Linux
SysAdm | http://www.pld-linux.org/
bagginsatmimuw.edu.pl
bagginsatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Oct 1, 2012, at 4:55 PM, Jan Rękorajski wrote: What digest is in use for file content? The digest algorithm is configurable in rpm-5.x, and is more likely to be SHA256/SHA1 than MD5 these days. Both rpm 4.5 and now rpm 5.4 use MD5 as file digest algo. And ripping out filemd5 index is quite pointless, as the problem is the Agreed: pointless hack-o-round removing the Filedigest index … inability to install package build with rpm5 on a system with rpm 4.5, … but legacy compatibility doesn't come for free, and rpm-4.5 has no upgrade path (all explained carefully at length to arekm glen years ago when the decision to use rpm-4.5 instead of rpm-5.x was made) so the real fix is upgrade to rpm5. But it would be good to know what is the cause of that bug to not break things before upgrade. I can certainly generate the patch to rpm-4.5: convince me why I should waste any time on retrofitting stuff into an obsolete version of rpm-4.5 and I will do so. These are ancient -- and quite predictable -- compatibility issues associated with a change from MD5 to other Newer! Better! Bestest! digest algorithms. Hint: I again suggest you try removing adding entries to the Filedigests index to avoid having to solve legacy compatible issues that really do not matter. hth 73 de Jeff ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
decided to write, as mmazur said in irc that for him crash occoured also in Qt upgrade my random guess is that rpm45 does not like something that rpm5 put into .rpm package, as haven't seen rpm45 crashing for a long time. Retrieving [54/55] th::qt4-build-4.8.3-6.i686.rpm... .. 100.0% [1.7M (551.0K/s)] Retrieving [55/55] th::qt4-linguist-4.8.3-6.i686.rpm... .. 100.0% [1.2M (307.4K/s)] Executing rpm --upgrade -vh --root /... warning: /var/cache/poldek/http_distrib.dev.delfi.ee.pld.dists.th.PLD.i686.RPMS/libicu-49.1.2-2.i686.rpm: Header V4 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID e4f1bc2d error: LOOP: error: removing QtDBus-4.8.3-6.i686 Requires: QtGui = 4.8.3-6 from tsort relations. error: QtDBus-4.8.3-6.i686 Requires: QtGui = 4.8.3-6 error: removing QtGui-4.8.3-6.i686 Requires: QtNetwork = 4.8.3-6 from tsort relations. error: QtGui-4.8.3-6.i686 Requires: QtNetwork = 4.8.3-6 error: removing QtNetwork-4.8.3-6.i686 Requires: QtDBus = 4.8.3-6 from tsort relations. error: QtNetwork-4.8.3-6.i686 Requires: QtDBus = 4.8.3-6 error: LOOP: error: removing libreoffice-writer-3.6.1.2-2.i686 Requires(auto): libbasegfxlo.so from tsort relations. error: libreoffice-writer-3.6.1.2-2.i686Requires(auto): libbasegfxlo.so error: removing libreoffice-core-3.6.1.2-2.i686 Requires(auto): libswdlo.so from tsort relations. error: libreoffice-core-3.6.1.2-2.i686 Requires(auto): libswdlo.so error: LOOP: error: removing QtDBus-4.8.2-11.i686 Requires: QtDBus = 4.8.2-11 from tsort relations. error: QtDBus-4.8.2-11.i686 Requires: QtDBus = 4.8.2-11 error: removing QtNetwork-4.8.2-11.i686 Requires: QtNetwork = 4.8.2-11 from tsort relations. error: QtNetwork-4.8.2-11.i686 Requires: QtNetwork = 4.8.2-11 error: removing QtGui-4.8.2-11.i686 Requires: QtGui = 4.8.2-11 from tsort relations. error: QtGui-4.8.2-11.i686 Requires: QtGui = 4.8.2-11 error: LOOP: error: removing libreoffice-core-3.6.0.4-1.i686 Requires(auto): libbasegfxlo.so from tsort relations. error: libreoffice-core-3.6.0.4-1.i686 Requires(auto): libbasegfxlo.so error: removing libreoffice-writer-3.6.0.4-1.i686 Requires(auto): libswdlo.so from tsort relations. error: libreoffice-writer-3.6.0.4-1.i686Requires(auto): libswdlo.so Preparing...### [100%] 1:libreoffice-ure### [ 2%] 2:libicu ### [ 4%] 3:QtCore ### [ 5%] 4:QtXml ### [ 7%] 5:boost-system ### [ 9%] 6:QtSql ### [ 11%] 7:QtScript ### [ 13%] 8:poppler### [ 15%] 9:boost-date_time### [ 16%] 10:boost-chrono ### [ 18%] 11:boost-thread ### [ 20%] 12:boost-filesystem ### [ 22%] 13:libcmis### [ 24%] 14:libtorrent-rasterbar ### [ 25%] 15:QtCLucene ### [ 27%] 16:boost-regex### [ 29%] 17:graphite2 ### [ 31%] 18:boost-graph### [ 33%] 19:boost-wave ### [ 35%] 20:browser-plugin-esteid ### [ 36%] /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/libpepflashplayer.so includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash/manifest.json includes subdir, file ignored /usr/sbin/update-browser-plugins: Warning: pluginfile PepperFlash
Re: rpm-4.5-69.i686 crash on Qt upgrade
On Sep 30, 2012, at 6:08 AM, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: decided to write, as mmazur said in irc that for him crash occoured also in Qt upgrade my random guess is that rpm45 does not like something that rpm5 put into .rpm package, as haven't seen rpm45 crashing for a long time. As good a gas as any: wanna bet? ;-) Show me -v -v output and I can likely guess what the problem is. 73 de Jeff ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: packages: OGLFT/OGLFT.spec - include Qt support, remove .la, rel. 2
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 06:46:58 +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote: I can't compile it properly anyway... at this point x86_64 build tried to link against /usr/lib/libstdc++.so: http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org/index.php?dist=tharch=x86_64ok=0name=OGLFTid=46a4776a-6cea-4bb5-a723-efaa66f7388faction=tail You need to trace where -L/usr/lib in libtool --mode=link comes from. Maybe qt setup (-L$QTDIR/lib is common bug). Probably, because rel. 1 without Qt support has been build. As for .la I can repackage it in -static (after reading previous discussion), because it's useless and wrong in devel and _all of them_ are nondeterministic anyway (but it's less probable that most of the -static would be installed on builders), if you want to revive this discussion I got no response for the latter: http://www.mail-archive.com/pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org/msg05937.html http://www.mail-archive.com/pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org/msg05951.html Either BR: *-static for static builds _or better_, do some .la postprocessing to make them more deterministic (like s/-l(.*)/\1.la/ and disabling autorequires for other .la files). I prefer the second solution unless it creates other problems (for example: what if we don't have appropriate .la file, because library is pc-enabled? would it be enough to ship stub .la file instead?). -- Tomasz Pala go...@pld-linux.org ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: packages: OGLFT/OGLFT.spec - include Qt support, remove .la, rel. 2
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 07:43:47 +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
-%{_libdir}/libOGLFT.la
Without pkgconfig file (or similar) it makes -static useless.
There is no way to know its dependencies (e.g. optional qt).
I can't compile it properly anyway... at this point x86_64 build tried
to link against /usr/lib/libstdc++.so:
http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org/index.php?dist=tharch=x86_64ok=0name=OGLFTid=46a4776a-6cea-4bb5-a723-efaa66f7388faction=tail
and without autocrap regeneration there are missing symbols on all archs:
http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org/index.php?dist=tharch=i686ok=0name=OGLFTid=3258ac9a-13ed-4321-914d-2fc84f813009action=tail
--
Tomasz Pala go...@pld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: packages: OGLFT/OGLFT.spec - include Qt support, remove .la, rel. 2
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:48:31AM +0100, Tomasz Pala wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 07:43:47 +0100, Jakub Bogusz wrote:
-%{_libdir}/libOGLFT.la
Without pkgconfig file (or similar) it makes -static useless.
There is no way to know its dependencies (e.g. optional qt).
I can't compile it properly anyway... at this point x86_64 build tried
to link against /usr/lib/libstdc++.so:
http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org/index.php?dist=tharch=x86_64ok=0name=OGLFTid=46a4776a-6cea-4bb5-a723-efaa66f7388faction=tail
You need to trace where -L/usr/lib in libtool --mode=link comes from.
Maybe qt setup (-L$QTDIR/lib is common bug).
and without autocrap regeneration there are missing symbols on all archs:
http://buildlogs.pld-linux.org/index.php?dist=tharch=i686ok=0name=OGLFTid=3258ac9a-13ed-4321-914d-2fc84f813009action=tail
Looks like too old libtool (no CXX tag support?)
--
Jakub Boguszhttp://qboosh.pl/
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: packages: OGLFT/OGLFT.spec - include Qt support, remove .la, rel. 2
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:38:44PM +0100, gotar wrote:
Author: gotarDate: Wed Feb 23 22:38:44 2011 GMT
Module: packages Tag: HEAD
Log message:
- include Qt support, remove .la, rel. 2
@@ -69,7 +75,6 @@
%doc doc/html
%{_includedir}/oglft
%attr(755,root,root) %{_libdir}/libOGLFT.so
-%{_libdir}/libOGLFT.la
%files static
%defattr(644,root,root,755)
Without pkgconfig file (or similar) it makes -static useless.
There is no way to know its dependencies (e.g. optional qt).
--
Jakub Boguszhttp://qboosh.pl/
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: packages: transmission/transmission.spec - gui-qt subpackage (there is a Qt...
On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 11:34:22PM +0200, uzsolt wrote:
Author: uzsolt Date: Fri May 8 21:34:22 2009 GMT
Module: packages Tag: HEAD
Log message:
- gui-qt subpackage (there is a Qt-based client)
- rel 2
+cd qt
+qmake-qt4
+%{__sed} -i s...@^cflags.*=.*@CFLAGS = %{rpmcflags} -I/usr/include/openssl
$(DEFINES)@ Makefile
+%{__sed} -i s...@^cxxflags.*=.*@CXXFLAGS = %{rpmcxxflags}
-I/usr/include/openssl $(DEFINES)@ Makefile
+%{__make}
That's not what we do.
You should rather pass those values to __make.
--
Sparky{PI] -- Przemyslaw _ ___ _ _ ... LANG...Pl..Ca..Es..En
/) ___ ___ _ _ || Iskra | | _ \| | | : WWWppcrcd.pld-linux.org
\\| -_)'___| ||^'||//\\//| _/| | | : JID..sparkyatjabberes.org
(/|| (_-_|_|| ||\\ || |_ |_| |_| _| : Mailsparkyatpld-linux.org
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt
Dnia sobota, 6 stycznia 2007 23:23, Cezary Krzyzanowski napisał:
Dnia 06-01-2007, sob o godzinie 19:26 +0100, Łukasz Jernaś napisał(a):
While building KDE4 some issues came up. First of all our Qt4 qmake is
named different than in every other distro.
Nah - 90% of work is done. Just set QTDIR to %{_libdir}/qt4 and PATH too
$QTDI/bin:$PATH and everything works. Just some minor links:
KDE4 bailed out on such settings so IMHO not everything is ok...
--
Łukasz [DeeJay1] Jernaś
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: Qt
Dnia 06-01-2007, sob o godzinie 19:26 +0100, Łukasz Jernaś napisał(a):
While building KDE4 some issues came up. First of all our Qt4 qmake is named
different than in every other distro.
Nah - 90% of work is done. Just set QTDIR to %{_libdir}/qt4 and PATH too
$QTDI/bin:$PATH and everything works. Just some minor links:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] qt4]$ ls -l
razem 4
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2007-01-03 00:35 bin
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 22 2007-01-03 00:17 doc
- /usr/share/doc/qt4-doc
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 15 2006-11-22 13:34 include
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 22 2007-01-03 00:35 mkspecs
- /usr/share/qt4/mkspecs
drwxr-xr-x 11 root root 151 2007-01-02 13:32 plugins
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: qt 3.3.6 [was Re: th and macromedia flash under any browser]
On Thursday 13 April 2006 23:38, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Now new problem appeared. qt 3.3.6-1 from Th. When upgrading to it my fonts became very, very small. Downgrading qt back to 3.3.5 snapshot fixed font problem. Anyone? 3.3.6-1.1 from Th doesn't have that problem (in it two font related patches were commented out). Aria -- Arkadiusz MiśkiewiczPLD/Linux Team arekm / maven.plhttp://ftp.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: qt 3.3.6 [was Re: th and macromedia flash under any browser]
On Friday 14 April 2006 10:12, Paweł Sikora wrote: Dnia piątek, 14 kwietnia 2006 09:36, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz napisał: On Thursday 13 April 2006 23:38, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote: Now new problem appeared. qt 3.3.6-1 from Th. When upgrading to it my fonts became very, very small. Downgrading qt back to 3.3.5 snapshot fixed font problem. Anyone? 3.3.6-1.1 from Th doesn't have that problem (in it two font related patches were commented out). qt-3.3.6-1 from th works for me, And do you have wsxga? I think that's the problem with bigger resolutions on DisplaySize much lower than default in X. so $(cvs diff -u -r1.355 -r1.356 qt.spec) is not quite correct. It was also dropped on qt-copy branch for some reason (not mentioned in changelog unfortunately). Do we really know what these patches are for? -- Arkadiusz MiśkiewiczPLD/Linux Team arekm / maven.plhttp://ftp.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
qt 3.3.6 [was Re: th and macromedia flash under any browser]
On Sunday 09 April 2006 23:01, Aredridel wrote: On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 22:58 +0200, Adam Gorzkiewicz wrote: Dnia sobota 08 kwietnia 2006 12:01, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz napisał: Hi, Is macromedia flash working for you under Th (i686 here)? What I'm getting is white boxes identified as flash but nothing is displayed on these (no text, no graphics). Example url: http://www.miniclip.com/motherload/index.htm SOA Anyway - i have no contents in flash contdekst menu, under the right mouse click. Works for me -- flash 7.0.61, with composite extension enabled and render, with and without xcompmgr. Composite - that was it. After disabling composite I'm seeing flash animations properly! Now new problem appeared. qt 3.3.6-1 from Th. When upgrading to it my fonts became very, very small. Downgrading qt back to 3.3.5 snapshot fixed font problem. Anyone? Aria -- Arkadiusz MiśkiewiczPLD/Linux Team arekm / maven.plhttp://ftp.pld-linux.org/ ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 21:47, Jakub Bogusz wrote: so, my problem was that i had installed both athlon and amd64 packages on system (due wanting to run 32-bit openoffice, which needs python-libs) [..] Yes, it's known problem and already discussed[1], but no solution has been implemented so far. [1] in Polish language, but example patches should be readable in any language http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-pl/2004-December/121358.html http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-pl/2004-December/12161.html mandriva had some version of those patches, perhaps newer, so i took from there. if taking look on other distros, then the just put all their files to /usr/lib or /usr/lib64 - http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/SPECS/python/ - http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/python/FC-4/ Some time ago we moved arch-independent stuff (and, unfortunately, distutils) to /usr/share to allow creating packages with python bytecode as noarch. i've commited the changes, and tested so that i had amd64 and athlon -lib packages installed. when ran from amd64 python binary libdirs with lib64 were searched when ran from athlon python binary, libdirs with lib were searched. could you test and does it cover also distutils problems? -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
after some discussion with twittner, $ python -c 'import sys; print sys.path' default paths: ['', '/usr/lib64/python24.zip', '/usr/share/python2.4', '/usr/share/python2.4/plat-linux2', \ '/usr/share/python2.4/lib-tk', '/usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload', \ paths defined from site.py[co]: '/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages', '/usr/share/python2.4/site-packages'] so, my problem was that i had installed both athlon and amd64 packages on system (due wanting to run 32-bit openoffice, which needs python-libs) $ q -qf /usr/share/python2.4/site.py[co] python-libs-2.4.2-3.amd64 python-libs-2.4.2-3.athlon python-libs-2.4.2-3.amd64 python-libs-2.4.2-3.athlon accroding to search path, moving /usr/share/python2.4/site.py[co] to for amd64 package: /usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload/ for athlon package: /usr/lib/python2.4/lib-dynload/ solved my problem. so there are several problems 1. site.py[co] is in arch independant location, but contains hardcoded path to arch dependant location 2. imho it's wrong to package /usr/share/ at all to -libs package. does openoffice needs just libpython.so or something more from -libs package? 3. site.py[co] moving to lib-dynload is not perhaps the most appropriate place. i don't know where it should be my suggestions are to move portions from /usr/share from -libs to -common (-modules?) package. and py site.py[co] to some path that is first searched from arch dependant location. if taking look on other distros, then the just put all their files to /usr/lib or /usr/lib64 - http://cvs.mandriva.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/SPECS/python/ - http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/rpms/python/FC-4/ -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 21:43, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
Moving site.py to a architecture-dependant directory seems like a good
solution to me. And probably moving all modules from python.spec to
/usr/%{_lib} would do too -- python.spec is architecture dependant
anyway. Just leave both /usr/share/python2.4/site-packages and
/usr/%{_lib}/python2.4/site-packages for other python packages.
and which should came first in search path? arch dependant or independant?
--
glen
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 10:04:21PM +0200, Elan Ruusamäe wrote:
On Tuesday 24 January 2006 21:43, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
Moving site.py to a architecture-dependant directory seems like a good
solution to me. And probably moving all modules from python.spec to
/usr/%{_lib} would do too -- python.spec is architecture dependant
anyway. Just leave both /usr/share/python2.4/site-packages and
/usr/%{_lib}/python2.4/site-packages for other python packages.
and which should came first in search path? arch dependant or independant?
Arch dependant -- it may containt architecture-optimized versions of
some modules.
Greets,
Jacek
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Monday 23 January 2006 18:54, Tomasz Wittner wrote:
i was just hoping you can fix it (I believe in you!), as it seems to be
generic python problem on amd64 archidecture.
You are talking about ...
rpm -q --qf %{name}-%{epoch}:%{version}-%{release} %{arch} %{buildhost}\n
python
python-1:2.4.2-3 amd64 localhost
but it's package from pld builders.
What shows
python -c 'import sys; print sys.path'
? Is '/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages' listed there?
nop.
$ python -c 'import sys; print sys.path'
['', '/usr/lib64/python24.zip', '/usr/share/python2.4',
'/usr/share/python2.4/plat-linux2', \
'/usr/share/python2.4/lib-tk', '/usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload', \
'/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages', '/usr/share/python2.4/site-packages']
--
glen
___
pld-devel-en mailing list
pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org
http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Mon 23. of January 2006 19:03, Tomasz Wittner wrote: [...] It shows that on amd64 also /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/gtk-2.0 is missing. Oops - this path is appended by content of pygtk.pth file and gtk-2.0 directory existence. -- Tomasz Wittner ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Saturday 21 January 2006 18:39, Tomasz Wittner wrote: On Sat 21. of January 2006 12:05, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: so could somebody confirm or fix this? No, I can't, because, among other things, I don't have amd64. Also, I've never touched python-PyQt.spec, thus I don't understand, why have you sent this mail with CC to me ;) - I subscribe and read all topics on pld-devel-en. [...] i was just hoping you can fix it (I believe in you!), as it seems to be generic python problem on amd64 archidecture. and amd64 access is not neccessary to fix search paths in python, i believe :) -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Sat 21. of January 2006 12:05, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: so could somebody confirm or fix this? No, I can't, because, among other things, I don't have amd64. Also, I've never touched python-PyQt.spec, thus I don't understand, why have you sent this mail with CC to me ;) - I subscribe and read all topics on pld-devel-en. [...] -- Tomasz Wittner ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
python qt
is python qt being broken package? PyQt-x11-gpl-3.15.1/examples2$ python aclock.py Traceback (most recent call last): File aclock.py, line 4, in ? from qt import * ImportError: No module named qt python-PyQt-3.15.1-1.amd64 -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Saturday 14 January 2006 18:08, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: is python qt being broken package? PyQt-x11-gpl-3.15.1/examples2$ python aclock.py Traceback (most recent call last): File aclock.py, line 4, in ? from qt import * ImportError: No module named qt python-PyQt-3.15.1-1.amd64 it doesn't look into right place at all $ strace -eopen python aclock.py 21|grep qt.so open(/usr/src/examples/python/PyQt/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/lib64/python24.zip/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/share/python2.4/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/share/python2.4/plat-linux2/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/share/python2.4/lib-tk/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) open(/usr/share/python2.4/site-packages/qt.so, O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory) $ l /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/qt.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6.0M Dec 25 20:51 /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/qt.so* -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
Re: python qt
On Saturday 14 January 2006 18:21, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: On Saturday 14 January 2006 18:08, Elan Ruusamäe wrote: is python qt being broken package? PyQt-x11-gpl-3.15.1/examples2$ python aclock.py Traceback (most recent call last): File aclock.py, line 4, in ? from qt import * ImportError: No module named qt python-PyQt-3.15.1-1.amd64 it doesn't look into right place at all [...] a workaround is: # rpm -Uhv python-PyQt-3.15.1-1.amd64.rpm --relocate /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages=/usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload --force # rpm -Uhv --relocate /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages=/usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload --force sip-4.3.2-1.amd64.rpm # rpm -Uhv --relocate /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages=/usr/lib64/python2.4/lib-dynload --force python-PyKDE-3.11.3-5.amd64.rpm -- glen ___ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
