Reposting here, maybe i should have done that in the first place
to avoid duplicate work, sorry sthen@ and aja@...
----- Forwarded message from Ingo Schwarze <schwa...@usta.de> -----
From: Ingo Schwarze <schwa...@usta.de>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2017 00:38:09 +0200
To: Matthias Kilian <k...@outback.escape.de>
Subject: Re: Update textproc/xpdf
Hi,
Ingo Schwarze wrote on Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:40:15PM +0200:
> So either it has to be added as a dependency and passed to the linker,
> or it has to be disabled during cmake autoconfiguration even if it
> happens to be installed.
>
> As libpaper seems fairly useless to me, i guess you might want to take
> the second approach, disable it explicitly.
>
> I'm now investigating how to do that...
Applying the patch appended at the end on top of your patch lets
xpdf build, package, install (with pkg_add -r), and run for me.
It does spew crap to stderr that i didn't notice with previous
versions, but i may have missed it. Probably such splatter is
to be expected with "modern" software (sigh).
QStandardPaths: XDG_RUNTIME_DIR not set, defaulting to '/tmp/runtime-schwarze'
libGL error: failed to open drm device: Permission denied
libGL error: failed to load driver: i965
Looking at the build log, this looks somewhat strange:
===> Applying OpenBSD patch patch-xpdf_GlobalParams_cc
Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|$OpenBSD: patch-xpdf_GlobalParams_cc,v 1.4 2015/04/06 21:05:07 ajacoutot Exp
$
|--- xpdf/GlobalParams.cc.orig Wed May 28 20:50:50 2014
|+++ xpdf/GlobalParams.cc Fri May 30 14:27:13 2014
--------------------------
Patching file xpdf/GlobalParams.cc using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 103 (offset -17 lines).
done
Does the "offset -17 lines" mean that the patch should be regenerated?
Same for patch-xpdf_XRef_cc.
Why do you list png explicitly in LIB_DEPENDS, but not jpeg?
Given that the only other direct lib dependency, qtbase, requires
both jpeg and png directly and that the xpdf cmake run explicitly
tests for both, what is the difference?
I see this in my output:
-- Found TIFF: /usr/local/lib/libtiff.so.40.1 (found version "4.0.8")
but:
$ pkg_info -S xpdf
Information for inst:xpdf-4.00
Signature:
xpdf-4.00,0,@ghostscript-fonts-8.11p3,@png-1.6.31,@qtbase-5.9.1p4,Qt5Core.2.1,Qt5Gui.2.1,Qt5Widgets.2.1,c++.1.0,c++abi.0.0,c.90.0,freetype.28.1,m.10.0,png.17.4,pthread.24.0,z.5.0
No tiff in there. Any idea what is going on?
Maybe that's all harmless, but who knows, i thought i'd better mention it.
Apart from that, the build log looks reasonable to me.
I'll let you know if i notice any other oddities while running the
program.
Thanks again,
Ingo
--- Makefile Sun Oct 22 00:05:34 2017
+++ Makefile.is Sat Oct 21 23:56:22 2017
@@ -21,6 +21,8 @@
USE_GMAKE= Yes
+CONFIGURE_ARGS+= -DHAVE_PAPER_H=0
+
CXXFLAGS+= -DLOCALBASE=\\\"${LOCALBASE}\\\"
WANTLIB= Qt5Core Qt5Gui Qt5Widgets freetype c m png pthread \
----- End forwarded message -----
