Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Tanguy Ortolo 
Package: luatex
Version: 0.46.0-1
Severity: important
Tags: patch
Justification: fails to build from source

Hello.

The debian/control indicates that luatex 0.46.0-1 needs libpoppler-dev = 0.6.
But, when compiling againts libpoppler-dev 0.8.7-2, for instance:
[…]
configure: error: did not find poppler-0.10 or better
make: *** [build-stamp] Error 1
dpkg-buildpackage: failure: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2

So I suggest to put libpoppler-dev = 0.10 as a build dependency. :-)

Regards,

-- 
Tanguy Ortolo

PS: Even with libpoppler-dev = 0.10, it does not build, because of a compile
error, but that is another problem.

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 5.0.3
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (990, 'stable'), (500, 'testing'), (50, 'unstable'), (1, 
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 2.6.30-2-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages luatex depends on:
ii  libc6  2.10.1-7  GNU C Library: Shared libraries
ii  libpng12-0 1.2.40-1  PNG library - runtime
ii  libpoppler50.12.0-2  PDF rendering library
ii  zlib1g 1:1.2.3.3.dfsg-15 compression library - runtime

Versions of packages luatex recommends:
ii  texlive-luatex2009-3 TeX Live: LuaTeX packages

luatex suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information
--- control.old 2009-12-01 10:28:33.0 +0100
+++ control 2009-12-01 10:29:04.0 +0100
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 Priority: optional
 Maintainer: Debian TeX Maintainers debian-tex-ma...@lists.debian.org
 Uploaders: Frank Küster fr...@debian.org, Norbert Preining 
prein...@debian.org
-Build-Depends: debhelper (= 5), flex, bison, zlib1g-dev, quilt, 
libpoppler-dev (= 0.6), libpng12-dev, libjpeg62-dev, pkg-config, sharutils
+Build-Depends: debhelper (= 5), flex, bison, zlib1g-dev, quilt, 
libpoppler-dev (= 0.10), libpng12-dev, libjpeg62-dev, pkg-config, sharutils
 Standards-Version: 3.8.3
 Vcs-Svn: svn://svn.debian.org/svn/debian-tex/luatex/trunk
 Vcs-Browser: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/debian-tex/luatex/trunk/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Tanguy Ortolo 
Le mardi 01 décembre 2009, Norbert Preining a écrit :
 On Di, 01 Dez 2009, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
  But, when compiling againts libpoppler-dev 0.8.7-2, for instance:
 
 libpoppler 0.8 is in stable.
 
 testing contains libpoppler 0.10
 
 why should there be any versioned dependency?

Well, I thought it should be possible to build a package on a system
with build dependencies installed. From the Debian Policy Manual:
 If build-time dependencies are specified, it must be possible to build
 the package and produce working binaries on a system with only
 essential and build-essential packages installed and also those
 required to satisfy the build-time relationships (including any
 implied relationships). In particular, this means that version clauses
 should be used rigorously in build-time relationships so that one
 cannot produce bad or inconsistently configured packages when the
 relationships are properly satisfied.

If I understand that correctly, it means that, with the Build-Depends
met, it should build. But it does not, because, contrary to what these
Build-Depends say, libpoppler-dev 0.8 is not enough to satisfy the
configure script, that looks for libpoppler-dev = 0.10.

Anyway, the debian/control lists libpoppler-dev (= 0.8), that gives the
impression that any libpoppler-dev = 0.8 is enough to build luatex,
which is wrong, as at least 0.10 is needed. If you do not care about the
version dependency because the testing version is enough, assuming that
compiles with the Policy Manual, I think you should only list
libpoppler-dev, without version indication.

-- 
Tanguy Ortolo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Paul Bone 
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 10:52:27AM +0100, Norbert Preining wrote:
 On Di, 01 Dez 2009, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
  But, when compiling againts libpoppler-dev 0.8.7-2, for instance:
 
 libpoppler 0.8 is in stable.
 
 testing contains libpoppler 0.10
 
 why should there be any versioned dependency?
 
 Closing this bug, I do only consider the versions of poppler as 
 important that are actually used.

The source packages configure script expects to find libpoppler 0.10 but the
Build-Depend field specifies only 0.6.

This manifests when building against a lenny using pbuilder.  A log is
attached.

The log was generated using the command:

sudo pbuilder build luatex_0.46.0-1.dsc 21 | tee log


I: using fakeroot in build.
Current time: Tue Dec  1 21:55:41 EST 2009
pbuilder-time-stamp: 1259664941
Building the build Environment
 - extracting base tarball [/var/cache/pbuilder/lenny.tgz]
 - creating local configuration
 - copying local configuration
 - mounting /proc filesystem
 - mounting /dev/pts filesystem
 - policy-rc.d already exists
Obtaining the cached apt archive contents
Installing the build-deps
 - Attempting to satisfy build-dependencies
 - Creating pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy package
Package: pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy
Version: 0.invalid.0
Architecture: amd64
Maintainer: Debian Pbuilder Team pbuilder-ma...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Description: Dummy package to satisfy dependencies with aptitude - created by 
pbuilder
 This package was created automatically by pbuilder and should
Depends: debhelper (= 5), flex, bison, zlib1g-dev, quilt, libpoppler-dev (= 
0.6), libpng12-dev, libjpeg62-dev, pkg-config, sharutils
dpkg-deb: building package `pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy' in 
`/tmp/satisfydepends-aptitude/pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy.deb'.
Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
aptitude is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Selecting previously deselected package pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy.
(Reading database ... 9634 files and directories currently installed.)
Unpacking pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (from 
.../pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy.deb) ...
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of 
pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy:
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on debhelper (= 5); however:
  Package debhelper is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on flex; however:
  Package flex is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on bison; however:
  Package bison is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on zlib1g-dev; however:
  Package zlib1g-dev is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on quilt; however:
  Package quilt is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libpoppler-dev (= 0.6); however:
  Package libpoppler-dev is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libpng12-dev; however:
  Package libpng12-dev is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on libjpeg62-dev; however:
  Package libjpeg62-dev is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on pkg-config; however:
  Package pkg-config is not installed.
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy depends on sharutils; however:
  Package sharutils is not installed.
dpkg: error processing pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy (--install):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
 pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy
Reading package lists...
Building dependency tree...
Reading state information...
Initializing package states...
Writing extended state information...
The following NEW packages will be installed:
  bison{a} bsdmainutils{a} debhelper{a} defoma{a} diffstat{a} file{a} 
  flex{a} fontconfig-config{a} gettext{a} gettext-base{a} groff-base{a} 
  html2text{a} intltool-debian{a} libexpat1{a} libexpat1-dev{a} 
  libfontconfig1{a} libfontconfig1-dev{a} libfreetype6{a} 
  libfreetype6-dev{a} libglib2.0-0{a} libjpeg62{a} libjpeg62-dev{a} 
  libmagic1{a} libnewt0.52{a} libpcre3{a} libpng12-0{a} libpng12-dev{a} 
  libpoppler-dev{a} libpoppler3{a} libpopt0{a} libxml2{a} m4{a} man-db{a} 
  pkg-config{a} po-debconf{a} quilt{a} sharutils{a} ttf-dejavu{a} 
  ttf-dejavu-core{a} ttf-dejavu-extra{a} ucf{a} whiptail{a} zlib1g-dev{a} 
The following partially installed packages will be configured:
  pbuilder-satisfydepends-dummy 
0 packages upgraded, 43 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 0B/19.8MB of archives. After unpacking 57.1MB will be used.
Writing extended state information...
debconf: delaying package configuration, since apt-utils is not installed
SELECTING PREVIOUSLY DESELECTED PACKAGE LIBMAGIC1.
(READING DATABASE ... 9634 FILES AND DIRECTORIES CURRENTLY INSTALLED.)
UNPACKING LIBMAGIC1 (FROM .../LIBMAGIC1_4.26-1_AMD64.DEB) ...
SELECTING PREVIOUSLY DESELECTED PACKAGE FILE.
UNPACKING FILE (FROM .../ARCHIVES/FILE_4.26-1_AMD64.DEB) ...
SELECTING PREVIOUSLY DESELECTED PACKAGE HTML2TEXT.

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Norbert Preining 
  If build-time dependencies are specified, it must be possible to build
  the package and produce working binaries on a system with only
  essential and build-essential packages installed and also those
  required to satisfy the build-time relationships (including any
  implied relationships). In particular, this means that version clauses

BTW, I forgot, I interpret that in the way that it has to be buildable
on the distribution to which I uploaded, and so it is.

If you do not agree please contact the technical committee for a 
better wording of the policy.

Best wishes

Norbert

---
Dr. Norbert PreiningAssociate Professor
JAIST Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology   prein...@jaist.ac.jp
Vienna University of Technology   prein...@logic.at
Debian Developer (Debian TeX Task Force)prein...@debian.org
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094  fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
---
FAIRYMOUNT (vb.n.)
Polite word for buggery.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Tanguy Ortolo 
Le mardi 01 décembre 2009, Norbert Preining a écrit :
 can you please explain me what you try to address?
 A backport?
 A fun build on some stable system?

Actually, trying to do a “fun build on stable system” is what made me
discover the problem.

But I am not trying to address anything but to provide proper, accurate
information. There are these 6 characters in debian/control, “= 0.8”,
that providea wrong information. Replacing them by these seven
characters, “= 0.10”, does provide the right information.

So here is the situation:
- currently, the debian/control is incorrect, which:
  - is wrong, per se, as build-dependency information does not exist to 
be filled with anything, even if it works,
  - makes backporting harder,
  - makes “funny builds on stable systems” harder;
- replacing 6 characters by 7 other ones:
  - fixes the problem,
  - provides true information,
  - introduces no regression as far as I know.

 If you want that fix the deps please by yourself.

I would be glad to, but I am not the maintainer of this package. That
was why I provided a patch against the debian/control.  In general, when
I see a mistake, small or big, with or without impact, that I can
correct, I submit a patch, and so did I here. Do you prefer to continue
providing wrong information in it rather than to apply my one-line patch
that introduces no cost?

-- 
Tanguy Ortolo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Norbert Preining 
On Di, 01 Dez 2009, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
 information. There are these 6 characters in debian/control, “= 0.8”,
 that providea wrong information. Replacing them by these seven
 characters, “= 0.10”, does provide the right information.

No, you are wrong, because popller will change the API again (as you
can easily see from the amount of patches and changes), and then
= 0.10
is not enough, because we would need  0.10.1, too.

Can you provide that? No, becasue AFAIR (but I might be wrong here)
this is not supported.

   - makes backporting harder,

Wrong, it make backporting *easier, you need only change
debian/patches/series

   - makes “funny builds on stable systems” harder;

Well, that is what the package for stable is for ...

 - replacing 6 characters by 7 other ones:
   - fixes the problem,

No, see above

   - provides true information,
   - introduces no regression as far as I know.

regression in what sense? What *does* not work within the *normal* debian
process of
upload - build in buildds - install into the resp distributions
Can you explain me *where* there is the regression.

 I would be glad to, but I am not the maintainer of this package. That
 was why I provided a patch against the debian/control.  In general, when

Thanks, there are far FAR more important things like gettin gTL2009
work with luatex and the divert things, if someone could help there
(I sent already HELP emails to the debian-tex list without success),
it would be *MUCH* more appreciated than a so trivial patch as replacing
an 8 by a 10 which does not change anything in the normal debian
prcess.

 providing wrong information in it rather than to apply my one-line patch
 that introduces no cost?

Yes, becasue I might apply one of the old patches 
libpoppler-0.4
libpoppler-0.5
libpoppler-0.6
libpoppler-0.10
(becasue we are at 0.12 by now ...)
and provide backports?

I prefer investing my time in tracking time real bugs, not useless
bug that only occur if someone builds a package for a wrong distribtuion.

Could you try please to build *ALL* current packages in sid within stable
and see if all of them work?

Best wishes

Norbert

---
Dr. Norbert PreiningAssociate Professor
JAIST Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology   prein...@jaist.ac.jp
Vienna University of Technology   prein...@logic.at
Debian Developer (Debian TeX Task Force)prein...@debian.org
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094  fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
---
CLATHY (adj.)
Nervously indecisive about how safely to dispose of a dud lightbulb.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Norbert Preining 
reopen 559025
retitle 559025 prevent building new on old systems
severity 559025 wishlist
thanks

closing it in a minute in experimental, just to make some zealots happy.

20min time which could have been used in a better way. anyway.

Enjoy

Norbert

---
Dr. Norbert PreiningAssociate Professor
JAIST Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology   prein...@jaist.ac.jp
Vienna University of Technology   prein...@logic.at
Debian Developer (Debian TeX Task Force)prein...@debian.org
gpg DSA: 0x09C5B094  fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
---
QUOYNESS (n.)
The hatefulness of words like 'relionus' and 'easiephit'.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#559025: luatex: needs libpoppler = 0.10 to compile

2009-12-01 Thread Tanguy Ortolo 
Le mardi 01 décembre 2009, Norbert Preining a écrit :
 On Di, 01 Dez 2009, Tanguy Ortolo wrote:
  information. There are these 6 characters in debian/control, “= 0.8”,
  that providea wrong information. Replacing them by these seven
  characters, “= 0.10”, does provide the right information.
 
 No, you are wrong, because popller will change the API again (as you
 can easily see from the amount of patches and changes), and then
 = 0.10 is not enough, because we would need  0.10.1, too.
 
 Can you provide that? No, becasue AFAIR (but I might be wrong here)
 this is not supported.

Is it not? I thought I saw it somewhere, for other packages. Anyway.

- makes backporting harder,
 
 Wrong, it make backporting *easier, you need only change
   debian/patches/series

My apologies, I did not know that Poppler API and patch issue. The only
thing I saw is a source packages that did not compile although I had the
necessary dependencies installed.

So there is a good reason for that. Again, sorry if I did not see it,
my report was pointless. Sorry for the time it took you, too.

- makes “funny builds on stable systems” harder;
 
 Well, that is what the package for stable is for ...

Yes, but luatex's experimental version is needed as a dependency of
texlive 2009. Anyway, I am playing too much between stable and unstable,
that is my fault.

 I prefer investing my time in tracking time real bugs, not useless
 bug that only occur if someone builds a package for a wrong distribtuion.

No problem, I shall not reopen it now I know the reason of that strange
Build-Depend.

-- 
Tanguy Ortolo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature