Am 07.06.21 um 09:28 schrieb David W. Jones:

I think the last time I had a working PV (before name change to lux) on my system, I had to compile it myself.

You did, indeed, because at that time there were no readymade binary packages for linux. Building is now easier, due to the build process with cmake. If you've managed the 'old' build, the new one is going to be easy. Please refer to the documentation. And then you can build a .deb which works for you and for debian11 in general, and you can share it.

Sorry, I don't do flatpack or appimage. I've tried both with a couple of different apps, with complete lack of success, and no interest in figuring out why they didn't work.

Harry's comment about using flatpack or appimage was not directed at you, but simply stating the fact that these two methods of installation avoid issues with incompatible or inaccessible libraries, because they provide an environment where the necessary shared library infrastructure is provided bundled with the installation medium.

We're trying to provide installable debian packages for users who don't want to experiment with these 'novel' methods, but since you use a flavour of Linux which isn't so common among end-users, it's slightly more difficult to help you get going. Did Harry's hint not work for you?

Doesn't compiling something to use static libs also include everything inside the app?

It, does, but it produces enormous bloat. And if anything relevant in one of the libraries changes, you have to recompile, redistribute, and make all users reinstall. Linux has decided against this, and for good reasons.

Kay

On 6/4/21 11:24 PM, Harry van der Wolf wrote:
This happens more often with manually installing debian packages.

So you do a "sudo dpkg -i lux-<version>.dpkg" and get this error.
What you now should do is a:
"sudo dpkg --configure -a"
followed by:
"sudo apt-get -f install"

That should fix it.
And if you had done a simple DuckDuckGo/Google search, you would have found that as well as it is as old as the world (well, almost as old).

This could be solved by creating a flatpack or appimage which has everything "inside".

Harry

Op za 5 jun. 2021 om 10:37 schreef 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>:

    Am 05.06.21 um 05:31 schrieb David W. Jones:
     > Well, here's what happened when I tried to install it here on
    Debian 11:
     >
     > Preparing to unpack lux-1.0.9-0git-Linux.deb ...
     > Unpacking lux (1.0.9-0git) ...
     > dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of lux:
     >   lux depends on libc6 (>= 2.29); however:
     >    Version of libc6:amd64 on system is 2.28-10.
     >   lux depends on libexiv2-27 (>= 0.25); however:
     >    Package libexiv2-27 is not installed.
     >   lux depends on libgcc-s1 (>= 4.0); however:
     >    Package libgcc-s1 is not installed.
     >   lux depends on libstdc++6 (>= 9); however:
     >    Version of libstdc++6:amd64 on system is 8.3.0-6.
     >   lux depends on libvigraimpex11 (>= 1.11.1+dfsg); however:
     >    Package libvigraimpex11 is not installed.
     >
     > dpkg: error processing package lux (--install):
     >   dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
     > Errors were encountered while processing:
     >   lux

    Thanks for reporting back!

    The dependencies are the same as they have been throughout lux 1.0.8;
    this issue is not new with 1.0.9:

    I've probably misled you by simply stating that I made a 'debian
    package': I develop lux on ubuntu, here I use ubuntu ubuntu 20.04.2
    LTS,
    which should differ quite a bit in the set of packages and their
    versions to your debian 11, which is also quite brand-new and has not
    been released yet. What surprises me is that dpkg can't get hold of
    common packages like libexiv2, libgcc and libstdc++, but these may be
    naming problems, where the ubuntu naming scheme differs from debian's.
    In general, you can't rely on ubuntu-built packages to run on debian.

    I'll change the name of the packages I offer for download to make clear
    what the target distro is, to help other users avoid this pitfall. As
    far as ubuntu goes, basing on 20.04 LTS is quite conservative, and the
    dependencies should work on newer non-LTS distros as well - ubuntu
    users, please report back! For now, there are two debian packages I can
    offer:

    https://bitbucket.org/kfj/pv/downloads/lux-1.0.9-0-debian10-i32.deb
    <https://bitbucket.org/kfj/pv/downloads/lux-1.0.9-0-debian10-i32.deb>
https://bitbucket.org/kfj/pv/downloads/lux-1.0.9-0git-ubuntu20.04-amd64.deb <https://bitbucket.org/kfj/pv/downloads/lux-1.0.9-0git-ubuntu20.04-amd64.deb>

    As you can see, the debian 10 package is 32 bits - I currently don't
    have a 64bit install of debian 10 handy, but I just did the CMake build     here on the debian10 32bit system to verify that it builds and installs     without problems, so I thought I might as well put it up for download.     The ubuntu20.04 amd64 package is the same as what I had offered before
    as the 1.0.9 'Linux' package, only with a clearer name. Sorry for the
    confusion.

    How about you build a debian package on your machine? Then we can
    have a
    look at what your system puts into the .deb. Just follow the steps in
    'Building lux with cmake' given on the bitbucket page. Then I can put
    your package online if you like, to help other debian 11 users. To
    build
    a debian package, you have to invoke cmake with -DCPACK_BINARY_DEB=ON
    during cmake configuration, and to build the package you have to say
    'make package'.

    Are you dd or involved with the debian project? How about you help
    bringing lux to debian? With an actively maintained lux package on
    debian, we might rely on it trickling down to ubuntu and other
    debian-based distros - I've done this successfully with the vspline
    debian package, but that's already quite a bit of work, and I've
    shunned
    going through the laborious process for yet another package -
    especially
    as I don't have dd status and have to bother my mentor whenever I
    have a
    new version.

    @Kornel: Is there a way to provide 'linux bundles' which include all
    shared libraries, as I make them for the Windows stickware version? Can
    CMake output flatpak or a similar format which works on more distros?

    The CMake package build produces a package named
    'lux-1.0.9-0git-Linux.deb', can we influence the naming of the package?
    It might be good to have 'ubuntu' or 'debian' in the package name
    rather
    than 'Linux', and also the version, like 20.04, and the architecture,
    like amd64 - I've done the naming of the two packages I just put up for
    download manually.

    Kay



--
A list of frequently asked questions is available at: 
http://wiki.panotools.org/Hugin_FAQ
--- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "hugin and other free panoramic software" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/hugin-ptx/6850375c-4fbb-d5e8-c22f-d083c3187157%40yahoo.com.
  • [hugin-ptx] lu... 'kfj' via hugin and other free panoramic software
    • [hugin-pt... 'kfj' via hugin and other free panoramic software
      • Re: [... David W. Jones
        • R... 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software
          • ... Harry van der Wolf
            • ... David W. Jones
              • ... 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... Harry van der Wolf
                • ... 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... T. Modes
                • ... 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... T. Modes
                • ... 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... 'Kay F. Jahnke' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... 'kfj' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... 'kfj' via hugin and other free panoramic software
                • ... David W. Jones

Reply via email to