Here's the final (mostly) failed list. I was able to fix butt with a simple
header include patch:
$ grep failed rebuild_status
butt: failed, fixed with patch
dillo: failed, config specifically looks for fltk 1.3.
flwkey: failed, config specifically looks for fltk 1.3.
giac: failed, non-tr
On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 9:45 AM Michel Lind wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 07:18:54AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> > Upstream has made a new release and it's not fully backwards compatible
> > with 1.3. The plan is to create a fltk13 compatibility package for
> projects
> > which don't yet supp
On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 07:18:54AM -0600, Richard Shaw wrote:
> Upstream has made a new release and it's not fully backwards compatible
> with 1.3. The plan is to create a fltk13 compatibility package for projects
> which don't yet support 1.4.
>
The name should probably be fltk1.3 instead of fltk
ccess
zynaddsubfx: success
Thanks,
Richard
[1] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/hobbes1069/fltk/builds/
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Co
Upstream has made a new release and it's not fully backwards compatible
with 1.3. The plan is to create a fltk13 compatibility package for projects
which don't yet support 1.4.
I'll test in COPR builds first to see which packages cannot build with 1.4.
Dependent packages are:
OpenEXR_Viewers
Open
... there can't be that many people developing for both at the same time on one
machine natively (builds in mock would still work fine).
I use only one machine (a x86_64) and no 'mock' to develop the same software
for both x86_64 and i686. For i686 I start with "dnf install glibc-devel.i686"
a
Looks like there were silent ABI breaks in fltk-1.3.3 which was pushed
to F21. It lead to segfaults in octave. Other packages may need to be
rebuilt as well. Other users:
alsamixergui-0.9.0-0.18.rc2.fc21.src.rpm
alsa-tools-1.0.28-2.fc21.src.rpm
cinepaint-1.4-7.fc21.src.rpm
csound-6.03.2-3
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Przemek Klosowski
wrote:
> On 03/19/2014 04:05 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>
> fltk has been blocked from F-21
>
> Huh? What are you refering to? indeed there are no recent builds for 21 in
> the main koji (last one is from August)
See Kevin&#
On 03/19/2014 04:05 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
fltk has been blocked from F-21
Huh? What are you refering to? indeed there are no recent builds for 21
in the main koji (last one is from August)
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?buildOrder=nvr&packageID=1740&tagOrder=name&
On Wed, 19 Mar 2014 08:05:40 +
Peter Robinson wrote:
> So it seems fltk has been blocked from F-21. This in and of itself is
> fine but there's been no bugs filed against packages that built
> against it, no announcement that I can see and the package itself
> hasn't be
So it seems fltk has been blocked from F-21. This in and of itself is
fine but there's been no bugs filed against packages that built
against it, no announcement that I can see and the package itself
hasn't been retired in git, nor can I see a rel-eng ticket. Is this an
oversight?
Peter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/20/2012 12:04 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 00:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trma? wrote:
Probably
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Feature
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 00:06 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Adam Williamson wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> >> Probably
> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
> >>Mirek
> >
> > Jeez, Ubuntu still hasn't done that?
>
> I don
Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>> Probably
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>>Mirek
>
> Jeez, Ubuntu still hasn't done that?
I don't think ANY other distro has done that pointless incompatible change
(exc
On 19/12/12 21:35, Adrian wrote:
> *From*: Bryn M. Reeves On 19/12/12 17:30, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
>> Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>>Mirek
> So why does this bug not show itself on Suse, and any of the Debian based
> builds?
They presumably haven
-Original Message-
From: Bryn M. Reeves
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Cc: Miloslav Trmač
Subject: Re: fltk
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:01:40 +
On 19/12/12 17:30, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 a
be "magically" adding -lX11 during the link step on
>> Ubuntu
> Probably http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ChangeInImplicitDSOLinking
>Mirek
>
So it seems to be down to the fact that flrig includes :
$ fgrep 'FL/x.H' rig.cxx
#include
#include
From F
On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 18:30 +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> > On Fedora the following command fails:
> >
> > g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
> > -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Bryn M. Reeves wrote:
> On Fedora the following command fails:
>
> g++ -I/usr/include/freetype2 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE
> -D_THREAD_SAFE -D_REENTRANT -pipe -Wall -fexceptions -O2 -ffast-math
> -finline-functions -fomit-frame-pointer -DNDEBUG -g
ok installed
root@u1210-vm1:~# fltk-config --ldflags
-L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions -lfltk
> should be (built from source)
That might be what you get building from source but it's not what you'd
get on a current Ubuntu system with their flkt packages so it seems th
wn dependencies explicitly, and pkgconf style config lines should
> generally only list the library itself to avoid creating a situation
> where the caller fails to correctly identify its dependencies and
> doesn't know it. But maybe fltk intentionally does something
> inadvisa
reating a situation
where the caller fails to correctly identify its dependencies and
doesn't know it. But maybe fltk intentionally does something
inadvisable here.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
ull in libm if your own code uses eg pow() or sqrt().
I think the original poster is complaining about this specific
situation; IIUC that fltk tool is supposed to provide (pkg-config style)
the link line that includes most ftlk libraries, so that you can simply
run it and get most of what you need.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Adrian wrote:
> This attitude is why people leave redhat for debian/ubuntu, get fltk right
> and the rest will follow.
> We have tested already.
Adrian, no disrespect intended— but I believe you are making a mistake
here. It looks like package you&
This attitude is why people leave redhat for debian/ubuntu, get fltk
right and the rest will follow.
We have tested already.
-Original Message-
From: Adam Jackson
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
Subject: Re: fltk
Date
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> In some cases you can get DSO linking errors when you don't explicitly link
> to those other packages. People building from source might not care, but
> this can cause problems for official builds.
Can you elaborate on this or point me to
ld returned 1 exit status
In general you must not rely on what the libraries you link against
themselves link against. If you need a symbol from libX11, say so.
(I suppose one could argue that fltk-config is not like pkgconfig and
that fltk promises to supply you more libraries than you need to
No it is not, the reason flrig cannot be built in fedora as it is easy
in Ubuntu. Lets not get behind the 8 ball.
-Original Message-
From: Susi Lehtola
Reply-to: Development discussions related to Fedora
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: fltk
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:22:05
On 12/19/2012 04:22 PM, Susi Lehtola wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
Adrian wrote:
Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is
ridiculous;
[root@fedora18desk ~]# fltk-config --ldflags
-Wl,-z,relro -lfltk
should be (built from source)
[root@fedora18desk ~]# fltk
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 17:22:05 +0200,
Susi Lehtola wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
I'm guessing your build from source is a static one. The shared library
in Fedora is already linked to all of the above libraries, so if one
only uses fltk then one only needs to link to -
So we see by the use of physiology, and the material rights of
substitution how resolve can be found.
Adrian ... vk4tux
-Original Message-
From: Adrian
Reply-to: linux...@yahoogroups.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Cc: linux...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [linuxham] fltk
Date: Thu
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 01:12:38 +1000
Adrian wrote:
>
> Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is
> ridiculous;
>
> [root@fedora18desk ~]# fltk-config --ldflags
>
> -Wl,-z,relro -lfltk
>
> should be (built from source)
>
> [root@fedora18des
Please guys get your act together on fltk, the yum build is ridiculous;
[root@fedora18desk ~]# fltk-config --ldflags
-Wl,-z,relro -lfltk
should be (built from source)
[root@fedora18desk ~]# fltk-config --ldflags
-L/usr/local/lib -lfltk -lXext -lXft -lfontconfig -lXinerama -lpthread
-ldl
33 matches
Mail list logo
