The Precise Pangolin has reached end of life, so this bug will not be
fixed for that release
** Changed in: libxml2 (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Triaged => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
Hi Darko,
Thank you very much for writing this up for me mate!
I'm not sure I even need this as I'm just an average Net user?
My system is 32 bit but I think I installed this maybe when thinking of
doing a web site???
I tried what you wrote but keep getting errors like it doesn't exist,
Hi Andrew.
I do not think your issue is related to this bug at all.
As a user you probably have no need for a libxml2-dev package, only
libxml2.
I posted notes in reference to this bug due to a deliberate request by the user
(developer) for libxml2-dev:i386 on a 64-bit Ubuntu, which is not
Hi darko,
Thanks for your help again!
I do believe I don't need this anyway as you say.
Yep I'm running low on HDD space atm and have used the repair broken
packages in boot mode.
I will have more space when I defrag the drive which has windows on it
so I can safely erase Windows and then
Hi Andrew.
Generally, both versions of the library are needed if one needs multi
architecture building option (e.g. x86_64 native build and i386
backsupport (cross)build for 32-bit installations).
I am building my i386 and x86_64 application on Ubuntu 12.04.3 LTS using -m32
and -m64 gcc
I really don't know how to fix this issue or if I even need the
packages?
Just a user and not a Web Developer.
Thanks
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
libxml2-dev:
Upgrading from 10 to 12
$ sudo apt-get -f install dselect
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
You might want to run 'apt-get -f install' to correct these:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
libxslt1-dev:i386 : Depends:
$ sudo apt-get -f install
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
Correcting dependencies... Done
The following packages were automatically installed and are no longer required:
libp11-kit-dev pkg-config libgudev-1.0-0 librtmp-dev
I've updated from version Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS to Ubuntu 12.04.1 LTS
I was trying to update our library software
(http://download.koha-community.org/koha-3.08.06.tar.gz)
I've done:
sudo dpkg --set-selections install_misc/ubuntu.12.04.packages
sudo dselect
Option: install
Unpacking
** Changed in: libxml2 (Ubuntu Precise)
Milestone: ubuntu-12.04.1 = None
** Changed in: libxml2 (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: High = Low
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Reading through the duplicates it's not obvious why those users got
those i386 dev packages installed ... could anyone who reported the bug
or one of the duplicate give some context on what you were doing to run
into that bug?
I really don't think this particular bug is SRU material though and
I tried to install libxml2-dev:i386 explicitly (#913381), so that 32-bit
wine configure would detect libxml2 on a 64-bit system.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
So it would be interesting to know how the users who were seeing this
bug ran into the problem. It seems unlikely to be due to a deliberate
request by the user for libxml2-dev:i386, which is not something users
are likely to try to install. I think the libxml2 coinstallability bug,
despite
@Steve: seeing the number of duplicates it seemed a frequent issue.
Should we at least drop the Multi−Arch tag from the libxml2-dev then to
avoid letting users run into that error?
Re. High, I'm not sure how important libxml2-dev is for cross
compilations but I though we would aim at fixing the
Upload Laney's update to quantal, unsubscribing the sponsors since that
was the only patch to sponsor and milestoning for the LTS point release,
we will need to come with a smaller patch than the update for it
** Also affects: libxml2 (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
This bug was fixed in the package libxml2 - 2.8.0+dfsg1-4ubuntu1
---
libxml2 (2.8.0+dfsg1-4ubuntu1) quantal; urgency=low
* Merge with Debian (LP: #987502), remaining changes:
- Don't drop *.la file. Some libraries still depend on it.
libxml2 (2.8.0+dfsg1-4) unstable;
see bug #1014197 for the libxslt issue (will probably need to be SRUed
as well)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
libxml2-dev: /usr/bin/xml2-config isn't identical across
** Branch linked: lp:ubuntu/libxml2
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
libxml2-dev: /usr/bin/xml2-config isn't identical across all arch
To manage notifications about this
Sorry, but what's the justification for this being an SRU? Yes, the
libxml2-dev package is wrongly marked as co-installable, but I don't see
how the impact of this warrants an SRU - especially given this:
[Regression Potential] xml2-config reports the libdir is /usr/lib, while the
actual ones
As I mentioned in private email to Aron, I don't think we can sync yet
since there are still some consumers of the .la file (bug #1017486 —
help welcomed in fixing the two remaining candidates).
A minimal merge which just keeps the .la file does seem possible though;
here's the diff for
Hi Steve,
Sorry for bothering, I've compared the files from all supported Debian
arches and fixed it in the latest version in Debian. I guess version
2.8.0+dfsg1-3 is a good candidate to sync.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to
Hi Aron,
Steve, can you have a look at them and propose a new approach if
possible?
Well, your existing proposal is exactly the method that I would have
used. I don't see any reason that this would not work across all
architectures. What kind of scripts do you expect to be a problem?
--
I have ended up to decide remove the M-A: same status from libxslt-dev
(already present in Debian) and libxml2-dev (still not uploaded).
I think it's current solution by patching those scripts is not reliable
enough. Assuming all the architectures will produce identical
xml2-config files by this
** Description changed:
[Background] In the M-A implementation of version 2.7.8.dfsg-5.1ubuntu1,
/usr/bin/xml2-config still contains M-A tripples, which is troublesome
when the package libxml2-dev is marked as M-A: same. The problem is
caused by the sed call in debian/rules says
From a cursory look it looks like we should be able to sync libxml2 in
quantal. The question is just if we need to fix this in an SRU for
precise.
Aron: could you please add just some brief information about the bug as
requested in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Procedure so
the
Thanks a lot Aron for your work on the package!
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
libxml2-dev: /usr/bin/xml2-config isn't identical across all arch
To manage
** Description changed:
- In the M-A implementation of version 2.7.8.dfsg-5.1ubuntu1,
+ [Background] In the M-A implementation of version 2.7.8.dfsg-5.1ubuntu1,
/usr/bin/xml2-config still contains M-A tripples, which is troublesome
when the package libxml2-dev is marked as M-A: same. The
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: libxml2 (Ubuntu)
Status: New = Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
** Changed in: libxml2 (Ubuntu)
Status: Confirmed = Triaged
** Changed in: libxml2 (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided = Medium
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/987502
Title:
29 matches
Mail list logo
