Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
JF, I've posted revised packaging for mesa-libglw which converts it into using variants for -lesstif, -openmotif3 and -openmotif4. The packages build libGLw with differing library basenames and use a libGLw symlink in the base (development) package for compiling against these libraries. I still am a little uncertain as to the cleanest way to push this into fink unstable. I would like to keep the package info file named as mesa-libglw.info but decpreciate the older non-variant version (<= 7.0.2-2). I am unclear what the convention is for naming these packages when the variants don't naturally have a prefix (like -py). In any case, the current packaging seems to work fine, although lesstif needs a Conflicts added for the new openmotif4 package. Jack On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 03:38:25AM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote: > > Sure, _ its worth trying, if the pkg is really functional with each of > those 3 .. > In that case, breakage could presumably occur only the lib is called by > some program hat either directly or indirectly loads several of those > alternatives .(Almost sure to remember there are such packages..) > > Still, the pkg is technically wrong, in the sense that it would then need > at least a "Depends" on such an alternative... > And anyway it would need at least something like a very visible DescUsage > as : > "Any package depending on this one MUST alse depend on either lesstif or > openmotifxyz, and make sure to load their libs .." > > I'm not sure this is a very comfortable solution; I might still prefer to > force > a dep say on openmotif4 if you want, and make sure all symbols link to that > one .. > > Jean-Francois - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
On 26 Apr 2008, at 22:49, Jack Howarth wrote: > JF, >Don't forget that I had to manually add the -lXm to the link > flags in the original mesa-libglw patch. I would argue that the > approach to leave the these symbols undefined and suppress > the error is more convention. The fedora developers don't link > libGLw against a specific motif and their libGLw works equally > well with lesstif and openmotif. I would avoid forking mesa-libGLw > into lesstif, openmotif3 and openmotif4 variants until it is > definitely proved that breakage occurs. If we have to resort to > variants, things will be pretty ugly as we will have to change > the basename of libGLw or bury it in a subdirectory so that > multiple versions can co-exist. > Jack > ps I will grant you that the debian libGLw is linked against > libXm but they also refuse to support openmotif due to the > licensing. So they can ignore the problem of supporting > both lesstif and openmotif. Sure, _ its worth trying, if the pkg is really functional with each of those 3 .. In that case, breakage could presumably occur only the lib is called by some program hat either directly or indirectly loads several of those alternatives .(Almost sure to remember there are such packages..) Still, the pkg is technically wrong, in the sense that it would then need at least a "Depends" on such an alternative... And anyway it would need at least something like a very visible DescUsage as : "Any package depending on this one MUST alse depend on either lesstif or openmotifxyz, and make sure to load their libs .." I'm not sure this is a very comfortable solution; I might still prefer to force a dep say on openmotif4 if you want, and make sure all symbols link to that one .. Jean-Francois - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
JF, Don't forget that I had to manually add the -lXm to the link flags in the original mesa-libglw patch. I would argue that the approach to leave the these symbols undefined and suppress the error is more convention. The fedora developers don't link libGLw against a specific motif and their libGLw works equally well with lesstif and openmotif. I would avoid forking mesa-libGLw into lesstif, openmotif3 and openmotif4 variants until it is definitely proved that breakage occurs. If we have to resort to variants, things will be pretty ugly as we will have to change the basename of libGLw or bury it in a subdirectory so that multiple versions can co-exist. Jack ps I will grant you that the debian libGLw is linked against libXm but they also refuse to support openmotif due to the licensing. So they can ignore the problem of supporting both lesstif and openmotif. On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 08:12:37PM +0200, Jean-François Mertens wrote: > > On 26 Apr 2008, at 18:09, Jack Howarth wrote: > >>In working up some test packaging for a new openmotif4 >> package (to provide openmotif 2.3.0), I discovered that my >> current mesa-libglw package is explicitly linking libXm >> into libGLw.dylib. By comparision, the mesa-libglw package >> in fedora 8 linux doesn't do this (allowing the same >> libglw to be used by lesstif, openmotif3 and openmotif4. >> I have verified that by adding the LDFLAGS of >> -Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup to the link command for >> libGLw that we can drop the explict linkage on libXm. >> This allows mesa-libglw to only BuildDepends on openmotif3 >> but not Depends on openmotif3-shlibs. This allows me >> to build molmol aginst openmotif4 and successfully use >> the libGLw created against openmotif3 with the resulting >> molmol binary. I plan on updating the mesa-libglw >> packaging with these changes today. >> Jack > > > > Jajk, > > I see the following diff : > > 7c7 > < Depends: x11, openmotif3-shlibs, %N-shlibs (= %v-%r) > --- > > Depends: x11, %N-shlibs (= %v-%r) > 12c12 > < make OPT_FLAGS="-O3 -I%p/include" LIB_DIR=lib darwin > --- > > make OPT_FLAGS="-O3 -I%p/include" LIB_DIR=lib darwin > LDFLAGS="-Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup" > 22c22 > < Depends: x11, openmotif3-shlibs > --- > > Depends: x11 > > > This doesn't make the pkg any different,at least for users who have > openmotif3 installed > (this was an obvious missing buildepend in the previous version and still > is_) > For such users, there will be no undefined symbols, and the additional > LDFLAGS > won't do anything. > For the others, they are picking up probably a variety of symbols from > lesstiff, > or from openmotif4 when that is there, (or from several of those..), > depending on > their configuration at build time, and you are generating a bunch of > different debs, > probably all of them illegal since they have no dep on the libraries from > which they > linked symbols ! > A correct package must generate identical debs independent of the > installation on > which it is built ! > > Cheers, > > Jean-Francois - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
On 26 Apr 2008, at 20:29, Martin Costabel wrote: > Jean-François Mertens wrote: > [] >> I see the following diff : >> >> ... > Why should these symbols be picked up if -lXm is not on the linker > line > and Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup is present? Sorry, had forgotten to diff the patch file too.. JF - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
Jean-François Mertens wrote: [] > I see the following diff : > > 7c7 > < Depends: x11, openmotif3-shlibs, %N-shlibs (= %v-%r) > --- > > Depends: x11, %N-shlibs (= %v-%r) > 12c12 > < make OPT_FLAGS="-O3 -I%p/include" LIB_DIR=lib darwin > --- > > make OPT_FLAGS="-O3 -I%p/include" LIB_DIR=lib darwin LDFLAGS="- > Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup" > 22c22 > < Depends: x11, openmotif3-shlibs > --- > > Depends: x11 > > > This doesn't make the pkg any different,at least for users who have > openmotif3 installed > (this was an obvious missing buildepend in the previous version and > still is_) > For such users, there will be no undefined symbols, and the > additional LDFLAGS > won't do anything. > For the others, they are picking up probably a variety of symbols > from lesstiff, > or from openmotif4 when that is there, (or from several of those..), > depending on > their configuration at build time, and you are generating a bunch of > different debs, Why should these symbols be picked up if -lXm is not on the linker line and Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup is present? -- Martin - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
On 26 Apr 2008, at 18:09, Jack Howarth wrote: >In working up some test packaging for a new openmotif4 > package (to provide openmotif 2.3.0), I discovered that my > current mesa-libglw package is explicitly linking libXm > into libGLw.dylib. By comparision, the mesa-libglw package > in fedora 8 linux doesn't do this (allowing the same > libglw to be used by lesstif, openmotif3 and openmotif4. > I have verified that by adding the LDFLAGS of > -Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup to the link command for > libGLw that we can drop the explict linkage on libXm. > This allows mesa-libglw to only BuildDepends on openmotif3 > but not Depends on openmotif3-shlibs. This allows me > to build molmol aginst openmotif4 and successfully use > the libGLw created against openmotif3 with the resulting > molmol binary. I plan on updating the mesa-libglw > packaging with these changes today. > Jack Jajk, I see the following diff : 7c7 < Depends: x11, openmotif3-shlibs, %N-shlibs (= %v-%r) --- > Depends: x11, %N-shlibs (= %v-%r) 12c12 < make OPT_FLAGS="-O3 -I%p/include" LIB_DIR=lib darwin --- > make OPT_FLAGS="-O3 -I%p/include" LIB_DIR=lib darwin LDFLAGS="- Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup" 22c22 < Depends: x11, openmotif3-shlibs --- > Depends: x11 This doesn't make the pkg any different,at least for users who have openmotif3 installed (this was an obvious missing buildepend in the previous version and still is_) For such users, there will be no undefined symbols, and the additional LDFLAGS won't do anything. For the others, they are picking up probably a variety of symbols from lesstiff, or from openmotif4 when that is there, (or from several of those..), depending on their configuration at build time, and you are generating a bunch of different debs, probably all of them illegal since they have no dep on the libraries from which they linked symbols ! A correct package must generate identical debs independent of the installation on which it is built ! Cheers, Jean-Francois - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
Re: [Fink-devel] mesa-libglw and openmotif4
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 12:09:45PM -0400, Jack Howarth wrote: >In working up some test packaging for a new openmotif4 > package (to provide openmotif 2.3.0), I discovered that my > current mesa-libglw package is explicitly linking libXm > into libGLw.dylib. By comparision, the mesa-libglw package > in fedora 8 linux doesn't do this (allowing the same > libglw to be used by lesstif, openmotif3 and openmotif4. > I have verified that by adding the LDFLAGS of > -Wl,-undefined,dynamic_lookup to the link command for > libGLw that we can drop the explict linkage on libXm. How does that prove that? -undefined dynamic_lookup would explicitly *allow* building lib libGLw even if it had undefined symbols. Perhaps you mean to use -undefined error and/or to look for NOUNDEFS in 'otool -hv'? dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
