Tim, Slavek, over the weekend I did a full TDE rebuild in Jessie. The only two packages to fail were compiz-fusion-plugins-main-trinity and compiz-fusion-plugins-extra-trinity, due to a missing depencency for libjpeg62-dev. The attached 'control' files fix the problem for both of them. Just rename the files back to 'control'.
Cheers Michele
On Tuesday 09 of December 2014 04:46:34 Michele Calgaro wrote:
Tim, Slavek, over the weekend I did a full TDE rebuild in Jessie. The only two packages to fail were compiz-fusion-plugins-main-trinity and compiz-fusion-plugins-extra-trinity, due to a missing depencency for libjpeg62-dev. The attached 'control' files fix the problem for both of them. Just rename the files back to 'control'.
Cheers Michele
I believe that it is better to use a general dependence libjpeg-dev. What do you think?
On 2014/12/09 01:27 PM, Slávek Banko wrote:
On Tuesday 09 of December 2014 04:46:34 Michele Calgaro wrote:
Tim, Slavek, over the weekend I did a full TDE rebuild in Jessie. The only two packages to fail were compiz-fusion-plugins-main-trinity and compiz-fusion-plugins-extra-trinity, due to a missing depencency for libjpeg62-dev. The attached 'control' files fix the problem for both of them. Just rename the files back to 'control'.
Cheers Michele
I believe that it is better to use a general dependence libjpeg-dev. What do you think?
That's probably better. Both libjpeg62-dev and libjpeg62-turbo-dev provides libjpeg-dev. I didn't try building using only a dependency on libjpeg-dev, but if there is no FTBFS in any distro, I would go for it.
Cheers Michele
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
On 2014/12/09 01:27 PM, Slávek Banko wrote:
On Tuesday 09 of December 2014 04:46:34 Michele Calgaro wrote:
Tim, Slavek, over the weekend I did a full TDE rebuild in Jessie. The only two packages to fail were compiz-fusion-plugins-main-trinity and compiz-fusion-plugins-extra-trinity, due to a missing depencency for libjpeg62-dev. The attached 'control' files fix the problem for both of them. Just rename the files back to 'control'.
Cheers Michele
I believe that it is better to use a general dependence libjpeg-dev. What do you think?
That's probably better. Both libjpeg62-dev and libjpeg62-turbo-dev provides libjpeg-dev. I didn't try building using only a dependency on libjpeg-dev, but if there is no FTBFS in any distro, I would go for it.
Cheers Michele
Slavek, do you want to handle this by building on your PPA and I'll copy to the main archive once the builds are complete?
For R14.0.1 I will look into moving some of these older -deps packages into the main GIT repositories.
Tim
On 12/10/2014 01:00 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
For R14.0.1 I will look into moving some of these older -deps packages into the main GIT repositories.
Good! I think that was my first request on the ML almost 2 years ago :-) If I can put forward a suggestion, we can create an "extra-dependencies" folder, similar to the "dependencies" and "libraries" folder already in the repo. I already use a similar structure, although my "extra-dependencies" folder is outside of the GIT repo at the moment.
Cheers Michele
On Wednesday 10 of December 2014 05:00:20 Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 2014/12/09 01:27 PM, Slávek Banko wrote:
On Tuesday 09 of December 2014 04:46:34 Michele Calgaro wrote:
Tim, Slavek, over the weekend I did a full TDE rebuild in Jessie. The only two packages to fail were compiz-fusion-plugins-main-trinity and compiz-fusion-plugins-extra-trinity, due to a missing depencency for libjpeg62-dev. The attached 'control' files fix the problem for both of them. Just rename the files back to 'control'.
Cheers Michele
I believe that it is better to use a general dependence libjpeg-dev. What do you think?
That's probably better. Both libjpeg62-dev and libjpeg62-turbo-dev provides libjpeg-dev. I didn't try building using only a dependency on libjpeg-dev, but if there is no FTBFS in any distro, I would go for it.
Cheers Michele
Slavek, do you want to handle this by building on your PPA and I'll copy to the main archive once the builds are complete?
For R14.0.1 I will look into moving some of these older -deps packages into the main GIT repositories.
Tim
For a moment, all updated packages will be ready to copy: https://quickbuild.pearsoncomputing.net/~slavek-banko/+archive/ubuntu/deps-r...
Here I would saw the question, what packages are useful and what packages we really want to maintain. For example, for such Compiz I'd rather doubted if we want it.
Some dependencies I consider to be temporary - such as lcms1, libept, libapt-front.
Some dependencies are definite candidates for inclusion into the GIT - for example libr.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA224
On Wednesday 10 of December 2014 05:00:20 Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 2014/12/09 01:27 PM, Slávek Banko wrote:
On Tuesday 09 of December 2014 04:46:34 Michele Calgaro wrote:
Tim, Slavek, over the weekend I did a full TDE rebuild in Jessie. The only two packages to fail were
compiz-fusion-plugins-main-trinity
and compiz-fusion-plugins-extra-trinity, due to a missing depencency for libjpeg62-dev. The attached 'control' files fix the problem for both of them. Just rename the files back to 'control'.
Cheers Michele
I believe that it is better to use a general dependence libjpeg-dev. What do you think?
That's probably better. Both libjpeg62-dev and libjpeg62-turbo-dev provides libjpeg-dev. I didn't try building using only a dependency on libjpeg-dev, but if there is no FTBFS in any distro, I would go for
it.
Cheers Michele
Slavek, do you want to handle this by building on your PPA and I'll copy to the main archive once the builds are complete?
For R14.0.1 I will look into moving some of these older -deps packages into the main GIT repositories.
Tim
For a moment, all updated packages will be ready to copy: https://quickbuild.pearsoncomputing.net/~slavek-banko/+archive/ubuntu/deps-r...
Thanks; copied.
Here I would saw the question, what packages are useful and what packages we really want to maintain. For example, for such Compiz I'd rather doubted if we want it.
Not sure; if it still compiles why not?
Some dependencies I consider to be temporary - such as lcms1, libept, libapt-front.
Correct. These should not be included in GIT.
Some dependencies are definite candidates for inclusion into the GIT - for example libr.
Correct again. The fact that libr was not already in GIT was actually a fairly serious oversight on my part; this will be fixed for our next SRU.
Tim
-
Michele Calgaro -
Slávek Banko -
Timothy Pearson