Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #8492 > unrolled thread
| Started by | notbob <notbob@nothome.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-06-17 17:36 +0000 |
| Last post | 2013-06-28 15:36 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 66 — 22 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-17 17:36 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2013-06-17 12:58 -0500
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-06-17 13:53 -0500
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-17 20:25 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-06-17 22:16 +0100
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-06-17 17:26 -0500
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> - 2013-06-25 13:41 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-25 15:49 +0200
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-25 14:20 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-25 16:30 +0200
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-25 11:31 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-25 11:58 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-25 12:34 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-25 13:20 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-25 15:51 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-25 16:51 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2013-06-25 17:24 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-26 08:27 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> - 2013-06-26 13:25 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-26 12:16 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> - 2013-06-26 17:29 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-26 09:42 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-26 11:55 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-26 12:55 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-26 19:28 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-06-26 20:04 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-26 20:54 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2013-06-26 22:05 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-27 07:33 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-27 13:55 +0200
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-27 07:32 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-27 07:15 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2013-06-27 13:18 +0100
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) - 2013-06-25 23:07 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2013-06-25 21:21 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-06-26 05:38 +0100
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> - 2013-06-26 13:18 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2013-06-26 09:30 -0500
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-06-26 05:32 +0100
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) - 2013-06-26 03:49 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Keith Keller <kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> - 2013-06-25 18:55 -0700
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2013-06-26 04:50 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop dillinger <dillinger@invalid.not> - 2013-06-27 17:55 +0200
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2013-06-27 20:03 +0200
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-06-25 13:59 -0500
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> - 2013-06-25 15:52 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop buck <buck@private.mil> - 2013-06-18 21:47 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-18 22:52 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop buck <buck@private.mil> - 2013-06-18 23:02 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> - 2013-06-18 16:06 -0700
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2013-06-17 15:41 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-17 20:43 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2013-06-17 16:19 -0500
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop root <NoEMail@home.org> - 2013-06-17 21:23 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-20 00:41 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Chick Tower <c.tower@deadspam.com> - 2013-06-20 18:04 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-20 18:36 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> - 2013-06-25 13:49 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Robert Komar <robk@robpc4.home.org> - 2013-06-26 22:57 -0700
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-27 12:19 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2013-06-27 13:28 -0400
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop notbob <notbob@nothome.com> - 2013-06-27 19:35 +0000
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Johann Klammer <klammerj@NOSPAM.a1.net> - 2013-06-27 21:39 +0200
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop Robert Komar <robk@robpc4.home.org> - 2013-06-27 20:31 -0700
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-06-28 09:45 +0100
Re: FYI: playing encrypted DVDs on yer desktop JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2013-06-28 15:36 -0500
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
| From | Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 17:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kqf8da$n95$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #8617 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 12:16:19 -0400, Octothorpe wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 13:25:05 +0000, Soupe du Jour wrote: > >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 08:27:22 -0400, Octothorpe wrote: >> >> >>>> Hardly seems like something some other distro will solve. >>> >>> That is not the point other distros will not solve the issue, only >>> moving entirely off of linux will solve the issue. >> >> Don't let the door hit you in the ass. > > Thank you for your snarky reply You are a big part of the problem. Because I'm calling you out as a troll? > > >> When you then whine about invented problems with Windows or OS X, >> please do so in one of their newsgroups. > > What are you a cop > > You have no power to tell anyone anything Ok, then whine here. Meet my killfile, troll.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 09:42 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ic38s5xa1p.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #8610 |
Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> writes: > On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:51:55 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > >> Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> writes: >> >>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 13:20:54 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: >>> >>>> Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 11:58:04 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> [putolin] >>>>> >>>>>> Circular dependencies are solved by installing both packages at >>>>>> once. >>>>>> >>>>>> Didn't you know that? >>>>>> >>>>>> You shouldn't even notice it if you are just doing an update. >>>>> >>>>> Only if the packages are binary packages >>>>> >>>>> How does one compile both packages at once with both packages >>>>> requiring the other? >>>> >>>> Don't know why you're compiling packages, >>>> but I could see how that might be a problem. >>> >>> So I can rid the system of hundreds of useless packages. >> >> To each his own. I guess. >> Seems to me like a huge waste of time. >> And I still don't see how compiling source is going to change the >> equation. If package A requires package B, compiling source isn't going >> to change anything. >> > > Have you ever built a system from scratch? > By your responses I can tell that you have not. > There are advanages to do so When I started programming in 1964, I guess you could say every system I built was built from scratch. We didn't need any OS and we liked it that way. For many years I added dozens of open source packages to a Solaris environment through compilation. I thought I'd seen it all but I bow to your claims of extensive experience. >>> Not when ./configure barfs it won't >> >> So, then you're stuck with manually copying some .h files at minimum. > > What about the libraries and other files it is not just an issue with > header files. Depends entirely on what configure does. Knowing that the packages do eventually compile tells me there is some way to work out whatever problem you are posing. >> Hardly seems like something some other distro will solve. > > That is not the point other distros will not solve the issue, only moving > entirely off of linux will solve the issue. I see. So you claim to have 2 source packages that are so intertwined that neither can compile without the other being in place and that these 2 source packages will compile fine on some other OS. I'm beginning to think you are making this up. Are you looking for help or just ranting? -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 11:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <sgfr9a-pt2.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> |
| In reply to | #8613 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 09:42:58 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: [putolin] >> That is not the point other distros will not solve the issue, only >> moving entirely off of linux will solve the issue. > > I see. > > So you claim to have 2 source packages that are so intertwined that > neither can compile without the other being in place and that these 2 > source packages will compile fine on some other OS. Your invention, who said they compiled fine on other OS. For an example of a nonsense dependency look to pkg-config. Why does it depend on glib? The function and use of that package doesn't require the dependency and it doesn't appear to use anything from glib but it won't build without it. So why the dependency? > > I'm beginning to think you are making this up. > Are you looking for help or just ranting? The question is have you ever tried to build a system from scratch? If you have then you would know what I am talking about. It is more than just 2 packages.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 12:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icsj04x15c.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #8616 |
Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> writes: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 09:42:58 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > > [putolin] > >>> That is not the point other distros will not solve the issue, only >>> moving entirely off of linux will solve the issue. >> >> I see. >> >> So you claim to have 2 source packages that are so intertwined that >> neither can compile without the other being in place and that these 2 >> source packages will compile fine on some other OS. > > Your invention, who said they compiled fine on other OS. > > For an example of a nonsense dependency look to pkg-config. > > Why does it depend on glib? > > The function and use of that package doesn't require the dependency and > it doesn't appear to use anything from glib but it won't build without it. > So why the dependency? At the binary level pkgconfig depends on glib2: # yum deplist pkgconfig package: pkgconfig.i686 1:0.25-4.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libglib-2.0.so.0 provider: glib2.i686 2.32.4-2.fc17 dependency: libpopt.so.0 provider: popt.i686 1.13-10.fc17 dependency: libpopt.so.0(LIBPOPT_0) provider: popt.i686 1.13-10.fc17 dependency: rtld(GNU_HASH) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 But glib2 does NOT depend on pkgconfig: # yum deplist glib2 package: glib2.i686 2.32.4-2.fc17 dependency: /bin/sh provider: bash.i686 4.2.39-3.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6 provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.2) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.15) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.3) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.5) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.8) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.9) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libdl.so.2 provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.0) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.1) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libfam.so.0 provider: gamin.i686 0.1.10-12.fc17 dependency: libffi.so.5 provider: libffi.i686 3.0.10-2.fc17 dependency: libpthread.so.0 provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.1) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.3) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libresolv.so.2 provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libresolv.so.2(GLIBC_2.2) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: librt.so.1 provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: librt.so.1(GLIBC_2.2) provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 dependency: libselinux.so.1 Being that glib2 is pretty low level, I don't see a problem. >> I'm beginning to think you are making this up. >> Are you looking for help or just ranting? > > The question is have you ever tried to build a system from scratch? > > If you have then you would know what I am talking about. > > It is more than just 2 packages. I think you mean have I ever tried to build a Linux system from scratch. Nope, doesn't sound even remotely interesting. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 19:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j2as9a-5h3.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> |
| In reply to | #8618 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 12:55:11 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> writes: > >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 09:42:58 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: >> [putolin] >> The function and use of that package doesn't require the dependency and >> it doesn't appear to use anything from glib but it won't build without >> it. >> So why the dependency? You still did not answer the question why the dependency on glib. pkg-config is only used at the building stage and all it does is to provide the library and header paths to autotools at the configure stage in building. Go have a look at one of the files in /usr/lib/pkg-config. Then answer the question. What the hell does pkg-config need glib for? You can build all your packages without pkg-config but using pkg-config is much easier go. > > At the binary level pkgconfig depends on glib2: > > # yum deplist pkgconfig package: pkgconfig.i686 1:0.25-4.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libglib-2.0.so.0 > provider: glib2.i686 2.32.4-2.fc17 > dependency: libpopt.so.0 > provider: popt.i686 1.13-10.fc17 > dependency: libpopt.so.0(LIBPOPT_0) > provider: popt.i686 1.13-10.fc17 > dependency: rtld(GNU_HASH) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > > But glib2 does NOT depend on pkgconfig: > > # yum deplist glib2 package: glib2.i686 2.32.4-2.fc17 > dependency: /bin/sh > provider: bash.i686 4.2.39-3.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6 > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.2) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.15) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.3) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.5) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.8) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.9) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libdl.so.2 > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.0) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libdl.so.2(GLIBC_2.1) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libfam.so.0 > provider: gamin.i686 0.1.10-12.fc17 > dependency: libffi.so.5 > provider: libffi.i686 3.0.10-2.fc17 > dependency: libpthread.so.0 > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.1) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.3) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libresolv.so.2 > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libresolv.so.2(GLIBC_2.2) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: librt.so.1 > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: librt.so.1(GLIBC_2.2) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libselinux.so.1 > > Being that glib2 is pretty low level, I don't see a problem. On my scratch built system..... rpm -qp --requires pkg-config-0.28-1.i686.rpm libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.17) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.9) libpthread.so.0 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.0) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.1) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2) libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.3) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 see the glib depends......NO? popt is not there also. BTW it was compiled with glibc version 2.17 as the libc library. Oh see it only needs glibc, the rpm dependency is given as this is a rpm based scratch built system. Now... Because you are only looking at some of the binary dependencies which you are doing that a bit incorrectly. You need to look at the dynamic dependencies using ldd for all the binary packages library and otherwise. Then you have all the run time dependencies for all the "scripts" that are included with the package. But I digress.... If you understand what pkg-config is suppose to do you would indeed ask yourself what the hell is the glib dependency for? In the beginning.....pkg-config did not have the dependency on glib it was added only as of late. Try building a tool chain of binutils autotools and gcc, not to mention coreutils. Then when you do get to the point of building glib it then collides with pkg-config because pkg-config was built with the internal glib. Not to mention the package manager issues. It is easy after you get to the distro point. Try thinking outside the box. That is my complaint and point.... Years ago in the good olde days it was much much easier. Things now today are getting completely out of hand. > >>> I'm beginning to think you are making this up. >>> Are you looking for help or just ranting? >> >> The question is have you ever tried to build a system from scratch? >> >> If you have then you would know what I am talking about. >> >> It is more than just 2 packages. > > I think you mean have I ever tried to build a Linux system from scratch. > Nope, doesn't sound even remotely interesting.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 20:04 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.wza85ky4a3w0dxdave@hodgins.homeip.net> |
| In reply to | #8620 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 19:28:51 -0400, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote:
> Then answer the question. What the hell does pkg-config need glib for?
[dave@x3 ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/pkg-config
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffa9d00000)
libglib-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x00007f2781610000)
libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f2781258000)
libpcre.so.1 => /lib64/libpcre.so.1 (0x00007f2780ff0000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f2780dd0000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f2781908000)
[dave@x3 ~]$ rpm -q -f /lib64/libc.so.6
glibc-2.17-5.mga3
Regards, Dave Hodgins
--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 20:54 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ic8v1wweyh.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #8621 |
"David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> writes: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 19:28:51 -0400, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: > >> Then answer the question. What the hell does pkg-config need glib for? > > [dave@x3 ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/pkg-config > linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffa9d00000) > libglib-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x00007f2781610000) > libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f2781258000) > libpcre.so.1 => /lib64/libpcre.so.1 (0x00007f2780ff0000) > libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f2780dd0000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f2781908000) > [dave@x3 ~]$ rpm -q -f /lib64/libc.so.6 > glibc-2.17-5.mga3 That's just about the same data yum gave. pkg-config uses the shared library libglib-2.0. It doesn't say which function in glib pkg-config is using. But I'm not appreciating why it matters. The GLib package contains a low-level libraries useful for providing data structure handling for C, portability wrappers and interfaces for such runtime functionality as an event loop, threads, dynamic loading and an object system. Lots of those functions seem like they might be useful to any C program. So if my pkg-config had symbols, "nm" might reveal what it's calling. My copy doesn't. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 22:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.wzberqw5a3w0dxdave@hodgins.homeip.net> |
| In reply to | #8622 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:54:30 -0400, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: > That's just about the same data yum gave. > pkg-config uses the shared library libglib-2.0. > > It doesn't say which function in glib pkg-config is using. > But I'm not appreciating why it matters. It doesn't matter. The standard way for installing packages needed for installing packages (the first time, not updating), is to install them into a chroot environment, not in the currently running system. With urpmi, that's done with the --root option. Regards, Dave Hodgins -- Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email. (nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-27 07:33 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <lhkt9a-jc4.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> |
| In reply to | #8623 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:05:40 -0400, David W. Hodgins wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:54:30 -0400, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> > wrote: > >> That's just about the same data yum gave. >> pkg-config uses the shared library libglib-2.0. >> >> It doesn't say which function in glib pkg-config is using. >> But I'm not appreciating why it matters. > > It doesn't matter. The standard way for installing packages needed for > installing packages (the first time, not updating), is to install them > into a chroot environment, not in the currently running system. > > With urpmi, that's done with the --root option. > > Regards, Dave Hodgins I am not following this??
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-27 13:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <kqh8ta$f44$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #8627 |
On Thursday 27 June 2013 13:33, Octothorpe conveyed the following to comp.os.linux.misc... > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:05:40 -0400, David W. Hodgins wrote: > >> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:54:30 -0400, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >>> That's just about the same data yum gave. >>> pkg-config uses the shared library libglib-2.0. >>> >>> It doesn't say which function in glib pkg-config is using. >>> But I'm not appreciating why it matters. >> >> It doesn't matter. The standard way for installing packages needed >> for installing packages (the first time, not updating), is to install >> them into a chroot environment, not in the currently running system. >> >> With urpmi, that's done with the --root option. >> >> Regards, Dave Hodgins > > I am not following this?? David Hodgins is on the Mageia QA team and Mageia, like Mandriva from which it is a spin-off - uses urpmi as the front-end to the rpm command. RedHat's own front-end to rpm is yum. I guess David was speaking of urpmi by force of habit. -- = Aragorn = GNU/Linux user #223157 - http://www.linuxcounter.net
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-27 07:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <qekt9a-jc4.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> |
| In reply to | #8622 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:54:30 -0400, Dan Espen wrote:
> "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 19:28:51 -0400, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Then answer the question. What the hell does pkg-config need glib for?
>>
>> [dave@x3 ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/pkg-config
>> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffa9d00000)
>> libglib-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0
>> (0x00007f2781610000)
>> libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f2781258000)
>> libpcre.so.1 => /lib64/libpcre.so.1 (0x00007f2780ff0000)
>> libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f2780dd0000)
>> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f2781908000)
>> [dave@x3 ~]$ rpm -q -f /lib64/libc.so.6 glibc-2.17-5.mga3
>
> That's just about the same data yum gave.
> pkg-config uses the shared library libglib-2.0.
>
> It doesn't say which function in glib pkg-config is using.
> But I'm not appreciating why it matters.
>
> The GLib package contains a low-level libraries useful for providing
> data structure handling for C, portability wrappers and interfaces for
> such runtime functionality as an event loop, threads, dynamic loading
> and an object system.
>
> Lots of those functions seem like they might be useful to any C program.
That is the question at hand. pkg-config would not require any of those
functions, since it only reads files in /usr/lib/pkgconfig to provide
autotools ( in this case configure ) the location of header file and libs
to configure as in -I /usr/include/<some package> and -l<some lib>
cat /usr/lib/pkgconfig/zlib.pc
prefix=/usr
exec_prefix=${prefix}
libdir=/usr/lib
sharedlibdir=${libdir}
includedir=/usr/include
Name: zlib
Description: zlib compression library
Version: 1.2.7
Requires:
Libs: -L${libdir} -L${sharedlibdir} -lz
Cflags: -I${includedir}
So pkg-config returns the following to configure:
Cflags="-I/usr/include
Libs="-L/usr/lib -L/usr/lib -lz
which configure then concats to its list of headers and libs.
A binary only system doesn't require or need or reads the *.pc files at
all, only if you wish to build packages are they useful but not required
( ie you can add the info directly if you wish ).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-27 07:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <0gjt9a-jc4.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com> |
| In reply to | #8621 |
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 20:04:22 -0400, David W. Hodgins wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 19:28:51 -0400, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> > wrote: > >> Then answer the question. What the hell does pkg-config need glib for? > > [dave@x3 ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/pkg-config > linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffa9d00000) > libglib-2.0.so.0 => /lib64/libglib-2.0.so.0 > (0x00007f2781610000) > libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007f2781258000) > libpcre.so.1 => /lib64/libpcre.so.1 (0x00007f2780ff0000) > libpthread.so.0 => /lib64/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007f2780dd0000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f2781908000) > [dave@x3 ~]$ rpm -q -f /lib64/libc.so.6 glibc-2.17-5.mga3 > > Regards, Dave Hodgins Does not answer the question. You have listed the binary dependency. I am asking the question why was the glib packages added to pkg-config? What function does glib added that is missed without that dependency. pkg-config in the early version did not required it why was it added as pkg-config can function just fine without it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-27 13:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87ip0zpx00.fsf@araminta.anjou.terraraq.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #8618 |
Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> writes: > Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> writes: >> For an example of a nonsense dependency look to pkg-config. >> >> Why does it depend on glib? >> >> The function and use of that package doesn't require the dependency >> and it doesn't appear to use anything from glib but it won't build >> without it. So why the dependency? pkg-config uses features of glib including lists, hash tables and string support. The dependency loop is broken by including a copy of glib in the pkg-config source. This included copy lacks the build-time dependency on pkg-config. Once you’ve built glib and pkg-config you can rebuild pkg-config against the installed glib, if you want. > At the binary level pkgconfig depends on glib2: > > # yum deplist pkgconfig > package: pkgconfig.i686 1:0.25-4.fc17 > dependency: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > dependency: libglib-2.0.so.0 > provider: glib2.i686 2.32.4-2.fc17 > dependency: libpopt.so.0 > provider: popt.i686 1.13-10.fc17 > dependency: libpopt.so.0(LIBPOPT_0) > provider: popt.i686 1.13-10.fc17 > dependency: rtld(GNU_HASH) > provider: glibc.i686 2.15-59.fc17 > > But glib2 does NOT depend on pkgconfig: glib has a build-time dependency on pkg-config. It uses it to find PCRE and check its version, for example. -- http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-25 23:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kqdb1i$hh0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #8583 |
In article <onpo9a-331.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com>, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: >On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:30:18 +0200, Aragorn wrote: >[putolin] >> I'm just using GNU/Linux >> now, simply because it's the best operating system out there. ;-) > >Not for me, linux is getting to be a big pain in the ass. It is getting >more like microsoft windows every day. except instead of update once a >week as in ms windows it's update nearly every day in linux. Hell even >autotools had two new versions in a Week! You can turn auot updates off you know ? :) (snip)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-25 21:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <icwqphy8du.fsf@home.home> |
| In reply to | #8598 |
bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) writes: > In article <onpo9a-331.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com>, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: >>On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:30:18 +0200, Aragorn wrote: >>[putolin] >>> I'm just using GNU/Linux >>> now, simply because it's the best operating system out there. ;-) >> >>Not for me, linux is getting to be a big pain in the ass. It is getting >>more like microsoft windows every day. except instead of update once a >>week as in ms windows it's update nearly every day in linux. Hell even >>autotools had two new versions in a Week! > > You can turn auot updates off you know ? :) > (snip) Auto updates? No thanks. Linux distros are hundreds of times larger than the base Windows install. You're going to see updates every damn day. No way I'd tolerate auto updates. On the other hand a cron looking for weekly or monthly updates MIGHT be something I'd consider but I just don't see the need to be that current. Fedora user, I'm current enough. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 05:38 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <kqdr75$m0b$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #8602 |
On 26/06/13 02:21, Dan Espen wrote: > bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) > writes: > >> In article <onpo9a-331.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com>, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:30:18 +0200, Aragorn wrote: >>> [putolin] >>>> I'm just using GNU/Linux >>>> now, simply because it's the best operating system out there. ;-) >>> Not for me, linux is getting to be a big pain in the ass. It is getting >>> more like microsoft windows every day. except instead of update once a >>> week as in ms windows it's update nearly every day in linux. Hell even >>> autotools had two new versions in a Week! >> You can turn auot updates off you know ? :) >> (snip) > Auto updates? > > No thanks. > > Linux distros are hundreds of times larger than the base Windows > install. but you wont be updating things that you didn't install. At the worst you might download the list of new packages available once a day. Or whatever. No need to do it automatically either. > You're going to see updates every damn day. No way I'd > tolerate auto updates. On the other hand a cron looking for weekly or > monthly updates MIGHT be something I'd consider but I just don't see > the need to be that current. > > Fedora user, I'm current enough. well exactly. the typical update manager checks every day or so and say 'do you want to update? Mine just took 6 seconds to download information and 8 seconds to digest it and then told me there was nothing to do. But its easy to turn it off and use (in my case) synaptic to get any updates, and review whether to update them or not. -- Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Soupe du Jour <soupedujour2000@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 13:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kqepnr$g9k$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #8602 |
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 21:21:17 -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) > writes: > >> In article <onpo9a-331.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com>, Octothorpe >> <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: >>>On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:30:18 +0200, Aragorn wrote: >>>[putolin] >>>> I'm just using GNU/Linux >>>> now, simply because it's the best operating system out there. ;-) >>> >>>Not for me, linux is getting to be a big pain in the ass. It is >>>getting more like microsoft windows every day. except instead of update >>>once a week as in ms windows it's update nearly every day in linux. >>>Hell even autotools had two new versions in a Week! >> >> You can turn auot updates off you know ? :) >> (snip) > > Auto updates? > > No thanks. > > Linux distros are hundreds of times larger than the base Windows > install. You're going to see updates every damn day. No way I'd > tolerate auto updates. On the other hand a cron looking for weekly or > monthly updates MIGHT be something I'd consider but I just don't see the > need to be that current. Cron or anacron are typically how auto updates are done on GNU/Linux... Personally, I'm happy with the way things are out of the box. I get notified when there are new updates and I apply them. It's not like with Windows where each patch takes 10 minutes to apply and then needs a reboot.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 09:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <8761x12bcv.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> |
| In reply to | #8611 |
Dan Espen wrote: > Linux distros are hundreds of times larger than the base Windows > install. You're going to see updates every damn day. Not on Debian Stable. There the only updates are security ones. > No way I'd tolerate auto updates. On the other hand a cron looking > for weekly or monthly updates MIGHT be something I'd consider but I > just don't see the need to be that current. cron-apt automatically updates the index files, downloads updates, and notifies me so that I can install them or not as I see fit. -- John Hasler jhasler@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 05:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <kqdqsv$7p7$2@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #8598 |
On 26/06/13 00:07, Bruce Sinclair wrote: > In article <onpo9a-331.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com>, Octothorpe <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:30:18 +0200, Aragorn wrote: >> [putolin] >>> I'm just using GNU/Linux >>> now, simply because it's the best operating system out there. ;-) >> Not for me, linux is getting to be a big pain in the ass. It is getting >> more like microsoft windows every day. except instead of update once a >> week as in ms windows it's update nearly every day in linux. Hell even >> autotools had two new versions in a Week! > You can turn auot updates off you know ? :) > (snip) > > > arguably if its not connected to the net and its working fine, why would you need updates anyway? -- Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-06-26 03:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <kqdrii$krp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #8606 |
In article <kqdqsv$7p7$2@news.albasani.net>, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >On 26/06/13 00:07, Bruce Sinclair wrote: >> In article <onpo9a-331.ln1@crazy-horse.bildanet.com>, Octothorpe > <Octothorpe@invalid.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:30:18 +0200, Aragorn wrote: >>> [putolin] >>>> I'm just using GNU/Linux >>>> now, simply because it's the best operating system out there. ;-) >>> Not for me, linux is getting to be a big pain in the ass. It is getting >>> more like microsoft windows every day. except instead of update once a >>> week as in ms windows it's update nearly every day in linux. Hell even >>> autotools had two new versions in a Week! >> You can turn auot updates off you know ? :) >> (snip) >> >arguably if its not connected to the net and its working fine, why would >you need updates anyway? Given it's linux, I argue that if it's working, leave it alone (unless you *want* to change something of course :) ) net connected or not. OK, to be fair, you probably need to turn java off for that to be safe. But all the linux bits are fine. :) :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web