On Monday 02 July 2007 04:48:59 Mikhail Teterin wrote: > Hello! > > I maintain the port of LyX on FreeBSD and was checking, how the new version > is built, so I can update the port quicker, when you make the final release > of 1.5.0 (it is currently at 1.4.4). > > Here are the problems I had to work around: > > 1. Boost -- it seems, that some of the recent changes in LyX code require > the most recent Boost-1.34 (lookup_errno, for example). Our devel/boost > port is not yet updated to version 1.34, but that's coming soon (I had to > use a patch released by the boost port's maintainer). This was not an issue > with LyX-1.4.4, where our port was also ignoring the version of Boost > bundled with LyX (I strongly oppose such bundling of 3rd-party software > personally.).
When we started distributing boost it was not widely available. Also the last version had certain issues. > 2. -lc -- explicitly linking with libc is wrong, AFAIK, but the > configure-generated Makefiles do this. This was an issue with earlier LyX > versions as well. We accept patches. :-) I do not remember this in Linux, so probably it is a matter of looking into configure.ac > 3. Qt4 -- the abandonment of other front-ends (especially -- of Qt3) is a > bit disruptive, because Qt3 (and gtk) are already found on most desktops as > almost everyone uses either GNOME or KDE. Qt4 is "the wave of the future", > so I'm not really complaining here. > > But, for a while Qt4 and Qt3 will often be found _on the same machine_. > Currently, I have to patch LyX' src/frontends/qt4/Makefile to make sure, > the -I/usr/local/include is _the last_ of the QT4_INCLUDES, _and_ insert > the -I/usr/local/include/Qt at the beginning. Unfortunately, specifying the > correct location with ``--with-qt4-includes'' does not have any effect. > > I never tried using Qt4 with earlier LyX versions. > > 4. Parallel builds. Specifying `-j4' to the top-level gmake breaks build. > Adding the flag to AM_MAKEFLAGS (so that it is passed to all sub-makes) > works. LyX takes a while to build, but more and more machines offer > multiple CPU cores, so supporting parallel builds would be quite useful. > Never tried it with previous LyX versions -- may not be a new problem. This works in linux, I do it all the time. > 5. tests -- when doing `gmake check' one of the three tests fails: > > PASS: test_convert > FAIL: test_filetools > PASS: test_lstrings > ======================================== > 1 of 3 tests failed > Please report to lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org > > Here are the differences between the output of filetools and the > pre-recorded regfiles/filetools: > > ./bar/ ./bar/ > ./foo/bar/ ./foo/bar/ > ././bar/ ./bar/ > ././foo/bar/ ./foo/bar/ > /bar/ /bar/ > /foo/bar/ /foo/bar/ > ./foo/bar/ ./foo/bar/ > ././foo/bar/ ./foo/bar/ > /foo/bar/ /foo/bar/ > > Not sure, what the right fix is -- in my opinion, both are wrong :-) The > normalized path should not include the leading "./" at all: "foo/bar/" > should be the answer. Is the path-normalization performed by Boost?.. All > tests were passing in LyX 1.4.4. This is known, in this case the test is either wrong or it is useless. :-( > I will now try to use the freshly-built 1.5.0rc2 (with post-build > self-testing disabled). If I don't report anything, it must be all good :-) What about bug 3537? http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3537 Is it working? > Thank you! Yours, > > -mi -- José Abílio
