Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
There's nothin to report, there is no problem other than misunderstanding on your part. I believe this was already correctly answered by Derek or Greg, but couldn't find the reply in the ml archive, so maybe you didn't see it. I didn't. src.rpm's almost always have more dependencies than the precompiled counterpart rpms to facilitate building, but the resulting rpm doesn't need them. Including all the compile deps would also mean the precompiled rpm would need the same deps, but needlessly, and could introduce conflicts. The src.rpm requests most of the required rpm dependancies when rebuilt, why not these two? Why make the task of rebuilding tougher than it needs to be? They would only need to be requested if the src.rpm is being rebuilt, as is already the case with most of the rpms required for compilation. I am not infering the rpms should be installed as a default for the reasons you stated above, but there is an inconsitancy in the rebuilding of this src.rpm, which surely should be highlighted? So if you insist on building from src.rpms, you'll havt'a get savvy in interpreting compile failures. Usually it's fairly clear, and some -devel rpm is all that's needed. Yep, and I've got them in the past and solved them on my own, but this was a particularly problematic one. Sometimes another app, but one that's not normally installed, or might conflict with another app you do have installed. Even if all the compile deps could be included, it would lead to endless, needless bloat. Particularly for large core files like kdelibs. Sure I am a newbie, and have a lot of linux learning to do (one of the reasons for doing this), but the one of the chief aims of linux must be to make it as user friendly and painless as possible. I am only trying to help in my own small way ;-) Why should future compilers search the net for information for the same problem? Is it not an avoidable waste of their time? I sometimes find it frustrating myself and I'm an advocate of Linux looking to learn! To attract users who are not, or business's to which time is money, niggles and problems like this ought to be resolved. In the open source community we have a powerful tool to report and fix these, producing a product ultimately more reliable and user friendly than any one potential software corporation. This is done for mandrakes developing software, why not its current release, which is after all used by a)end users b) less computer literate individuals (the vast majority of the world who we want to attract!) and c) larger numbers of people? Why do you wanna compile kdelibs from src anyhow? To optimize linux for my processor (athlon tbird). I'm also trying to install the least amount of software for my requirements, optimize the kernel and stopp all unessecary services from running. Mandrake installs a loyt, I assume to cover all eventualities (i.e. to be user friendly!) but i'm interested to see how quick I can go. Why bother? So I learn more about the workings of linux. I am challenging myself to see what I can learn. As an alternative (business) reason, to build a package targetting an alpha processor What are your thoughts? Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
I stand corrected. Apologies for going off on one, reading through my initial reply I realise I got on a bit of a high horse over something I didn't fully understand, and took out some of my frustraion over getting this on the mailing list on someone who was just trying to help me. I understand what Tom was saying in his first message now and feel more than a little foolish. Just one more query though. If the rpm when rebuilt asks for only the dependecies required by the binary package, how comes I had to install any extra rpms in order to rebuild it in the first place? As I understand Derek's message, the list of dependant rpms refer only to the binaries, there can be no alternative list for the src.rpm. How comes my installed version of kdelibs has not got these dependencies allready installed? Is this because it was part of my original install of Mandrake? That would imply that the dependencies are not actually dependencies Or am I making another basic grass roots error? I got round the SPEC file compiling for i586 by adding a file called .rprmc in my user home folder /hwb/home. read http://cybercfo.gkmweb.com/mandrake_a_la_gentoo.pdf For more info, if your interested. Thanks for taking the time to explain this to me. Huw Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
On Friday 04 July 2003 08:58 am, Huw Blackwell wrote: I stand corrected. Apologies for going off on one, reading through my initial reply I realise I got on a bit of a high horse over something I didn't fully understand, and took out some of my frustraion over getting this on the mailing list on someone who was just trying to help me. I understand what Tom was saying in his first message now and feel more than a little foolish. Just one more query though. If the rpm when rebuilt asks for only the dependecies required by the binary package, how comes I had to install any extra rpms in order to rebuild it in the first place? As I understand Derek's message, the list of dependant rpms refer only to the binaries, there can be no alternative list for the src.rpm. How comes my installed version of kdelibs has not got these dependencies allready installed? Is this because it was part of my original install of Mandrake? That would imply that the dependencies are not actually dependencies Or am I making another basic grass roots error? I got round the SPEC file compiling for i586 by adding a file called .rprmc in my user home folder /hwb/home. read http://cybercfo.gkmweb.com/mandrake_a_la_gentoo.pdf For more info, if your interested. Thanks for taking the time to explain this to me. Huw Jumping in here; there are some .rpms that are required to be able to build a .rpm from .src.rpm. These files are not necessary for the rpms to function after build but you can't build without them. They are sometimes devel rpms and are always the rebuild rpms. Hope this explains those odd dependencies a bit better. -- Dennis M. linux user #180842 Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
On Friday 04 Jul 2003 2:58 pm, Huw Blackwell wrote: If the rpm when rebuilt asks for only the dependecies required by the binary package, how comes I had to install any extra rpms in order to rebuild it in the first place? As I understand Derek's message, the list of dependant rpms refer only to the binaries, there can be no alternative list for the src.rpm. How comes my installed version of kdelibs has not got these dependencies allready installed? Is this because it was part of my original install of Mandrake? That would imply that the dependencies are not actually dependencies They are not dependencies for the binaries. Some examples might be: the compiler various compiler-like tools (lex, yacc,etc.) the development rpms for the libraries used tools to build the documentation. The binaries do not use them. For example, the documentation in the binary rpm might be in HTML format, but in the src distribution it might require several tools to create those HTML files. Once the files are created then you don't need the tools. As a further example one of these tools might be doxygen which pulls comments out of source files and creates pdf and html manuals from them. -- Richard Urwin Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
On Friday July 4 2003 03:52 am, Huw Blackwell wrote: Why do you wanna compile kdelibs from src anyhow? To optimize linux for my processor (athlon tbird). I'm also trying to install the least amount of software for my requirements, optimize the kernel and stopp all unessecary services from running. Mandrake installs a loyt, I assume to cover all eventualities (i.e. to be user friendly!) but i'm interested to see how quick I can go. Why bother? So I learn more about the workings of linux. I am challenging myself to see what I can learn. That is a very valid reason. IMO, everyone should compile a kernel from source sooner or later, if only for the knowledge and experience gained. OTOH, learning to build rpms from scratch is probly a better learning experience than just rebuilding src.rpms. There's many docs and tutorials, but a good place to start is the RPM-howto. It's on your system if you installed the Documentation packages during installation. As an alternative (business) reason, to build a package targetting an alpha processor What are your thoughts? Optimization, been there done that. I've done a lot of rebuilding src.rpms for athlon in the past. People like Texstar, with help from others, even rebuilt the entire distro (IIRC, 9.0) for athlon. Those with P4's have done it for that processor. Civileme did extensive testing for several arch's. Almost without exception we all found negligible to no performance increase over Mandrake's default i586. Those compiling for P4's find their system actually performs slower. That's also what civileme found for P4'and P3's. Mandrake has also done a lot optimization testing. They've concluded that the only libs that benefit are glibc and a few others. If you look in /lib/i686/ you'll find out which ones. For those with true 686 processors, Mandrake systems already use these further optimized packages. Some Mandrake gurus insist also building the kernel for athlon is a performance improvement. I've never seen any, other than psychological ;) Some gurus further increase the compiler options for athlon. Most of them report little to no improvement and a loss of stability. Now where you will see an improvement with athlon's is to overclock 'em. I've run a 1.4g athlon at 1.553g for over two years now. With my ram also slightly oc'd (135mhz) and timed to cas2, 4-bank interleaving. It won't reliably go much faster, it's only old pc100 mixed with pc133 ;) The cpu is good up to 1.612g, and still pass stringent tests. At 1.553g, there's a measurable across the board system performance increase (except for HDD's), and rock solid stability thru increased IO and cpu voltages. For the most part, those using XP's and fast DDR ram timings, already experience this hardware performance increase without oc'ing. YMMV ;) -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
On Friday 04 Jul 2003 2:58 pm, Huw Blackwell wrote: I stand corrected. Apologies for going off on one, reading through my initial reply I realise I got on a bit of a high horse over something I didn't fully understand, and took out some of my frustraion over getting this on the mailing list on someone who was just trying to help me. I understand what Tom was saying in his first message now and feel more than a little foolish. No problemo. You thought you had found an error and wanted to help fix it. Thats good :-) Just one more query though. If the rpm when rebuilt asks for only the dependecies required by the binary package, how comes I had to install any extra rpms in order to rebuild it in the first place? As I understand Derek's message, the list of dependant rpms refer only to the binaries, there can be no alternative list for the src.rpm. How comes my installed version of kdelibs has not got these dependencies allready installed? Is this because it was part of my original install of Mandrake? That would imply that the dependencies are not actually dependencies Take for example kdelibs-devel. It contains nothing but C header files. They are not needed to run the binary RPM, but of course they are needed to compile kdelibs with. On the other hand kdelibs makes extensive use of QT. So the binary package libqt3 is a dependency, but the header files needed to compile libqt3, libqt3-devel is not a dependency. I hope thats clear. derek -- -- www.jennings.homelinux.net Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
On Friday July 4 2003 08:58 am, Huw Blackwell wrote: I stand corrected. Apologies for going off on one, reading through my initial reply I realise I got on a bit of a high horse over something I didn't fully understand, and took out some of my frustraion over getting this on the mailing list on someone who was just trying to help me. I understand what Tom was saying in his first message now and feel more than a little foolish. Well, it was never my intention to make you feel foolish. I'm sorry if I did. MOF, I admire your effort to explore your system. More newbies and a lot of 'experts' should. Just one more query though. If the rpm when rebuilt asks for only the dependecies required by the binary package, how comes I had to install any extra rpms in order to rebuild it in the first place? As I understand Derek's I see you've already got explanations better than I give from Dennis, Richard, and Derek. Probly 'cause they understand it all better than I do ;) I got round the SPEC file compiling for i586 by adding a file called .rprmc in my user home folder /hwb/home. read http://cybercfo.gkmweb.com/mandrake_a_la_gentoo.pdf Cautions when optimizing, that I somewhat neglected in my previous 'optimizing, oc'ing' reply. I should have included more about the situation where you can easily make a system unstable by too much package optimizing, or even compiling from source at all. Particularly by changing compiler flags in rpmrc, an going too far with 'em. Sometimes even just building from source with default compiler flags, or a different gcc version than Mandrake uses for some of their precompiled packages, EG... As part of testing (limited by the hardware available to them), some Mandrake precompiled packages are de-optimized to improve usability. For example, mozilla. Here's an excerpt from mozilla 1.4's cooker changelog (CHRPM list) today: * Fri Jul 04 2003 Frederic Crozat [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 0:1.4-1mdk - Release 1.4.0 - Lower optimizations, mozilla doesn't like -O3 on gcc 3.3 - Remove patches 34, 61 (merged upstream) - Regenerate patch33 - Fix gre.conf file - Enable l10n In past mozilla releases, Mandrake was unable to even use newer gcc 3.x, and those were compiled with 2.95.x (Mdk's 2.96). So if you compiled mozilla from source, or src.rpm, using gcc 3.x, even with default compiler flags, you could just end up worse off, or with undiscernable compile failures. When you use Mandrake precompiled packages, you have support and testing. When you recompile src.rpm's and/or use tarballs those benefits are often lost, and should be mentioned when reporting bugs or problems. As should user introduction of 3rd party, specially closed source apps or drivers. Part of the past problem with mozilla/gcc was anticipated user java installation. As to Gentoo, in a comparison several months ago, a default i586 Mandrake install tested as fast, and even faster in some areas, than Gentoo optimized for, and runnin on the same hardware. As, or more stable than Gentoo also. IIRC, it was a pclinuxonline project on AMD Athlon hardware, or at least it was covered by them. -- Tom Brinkman Corpus Christi, Texas Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
Re: [newbie] Reporting Missing rpm Dependencies for kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm
On Wednesday 02 Jul 2003 10:03 am, Huw Blackwell wrote: Guys, Had an earlier posting on this list with a problem compiling kdelibs-3.1-58mdk.src.rpm targetting athlon architecture. After some trouble I traced the faults (with the help of some other linux users, including Stephen Kuhn - thanks!) to two missing package dependencies NOT asked for when rebuilt. They are libgdbm2-devel-1.8 kdelibs-devel-3.1-58 In the interests of the linux community (and other peoples sanity) I would like to report these so it is not a problem in the future. How do I do that? As far as I understand, the cooker mailing list and bugzilla are for cooker only, not the current release. So what do I do? Huw Actually I do not think there is anything wrong that needs reporting. The spec file contained within an RPM contains the list of dependent packages for the *binary* RPM not the packages needed to compile from src. If you were to add those two '-devel' packages to the spec file then they would be necessary to install the binary RPM. I think it is expected that people building RPMs from source should know how to resolve the compiling dependencies themselves. derek -- -- www.jennings.homelinux.net Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
