On 14.05.20 01:54, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > Has anyone tried any of the packaging tools based on containers, like > flatpak?
BibleTime has. Unfortunately not yet with the latest 3.0 RC 1, but 3.0 beta 2 has them available. Details: https://github.com/bibletime/bibletime/releases/tag/v3.0_beta2 > > On 5/13/20 3:30 PM, Michael H wrote: >> On Ubuntu, I've gone to PPA version for LibreOffice... which is a >> newer version than was released under Ubuntu 18 LTS. However, it's not >> as easy to go to PPA for sword apps because there are more >> interactions with dependencies between the sword engine, gnome, etc. >> >> Back in 2002 to 04 time frame: I was trying to build for palmOS, and >> ran into this dependencies won't line up, i need multiple minor >> revisions of the same thing to make everything work. I and ended up >> getting somebody to "staticly compile" apps for me on the linux side, >> so my work on palm wouldn't be falling into dependency gap. It >> increases the size of the package, but no longer depends on anything >> outside the package. In today's environment of massive amounts of RAM >> and disk space, i don't see why any 'application' on linux doesn't do >> this... pulling in the libraries and having an extra copy of them >> makes them far more stable, and it makes them run quicker. It does >> consume more memory and disk space, but the days when there was any >> risk of running out of ram or disk space on desktops are into double >> digits gone by. >> >> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 4:39 PM Greg Hellings <greg.helli...@gmail.com >> <mailto:greg.helli...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 4:28 PM Tom Sullivan <i...@beforgiven.info >> <mailto:i...@beforgiven.info>> wrote: >> >> Greg: >> >> The repositories do not contain the latest versions. For >> example, the >> Debian Buster repository presents Xiphos 4.1, not the latest 4.2. >> >> >> 1) This is the benefit and curse of Debian. It refuses to let new >> versions of packages in that are not bugfix and ONLY bugfix. >> Nothing with new features at all is allowed into a stable/released >> version of Debian. It's a benefit to users who need the stability >> (read: server administrators and people who develop software for >> running on those stable versions of Debian) but it's a terrible >> experience for end users. If you're using Debian anything (other >> than sid, their testing release) for an end-user desktop, then >> you're going to have a bad experience. >> >> 2) This is, again, an issue with the distro, and not with >> Crosswire or Xiphos. There is nothing we can do to affect >> upstream's release cadence and rules. Now, if the Xiphos project >> had enough developer manpower to maintain patches to the 4.1 >> series as well as continue development towards 4.2, then maybe >> we'd be able to get a 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 into old Debian versions. >> That's what large projects do (like Debian itself), but we just >> don't have the developer bandwidth to maintain multiple branches >> on any of our software. But none of our software is intended for >> server, long-lived boxes, either. It's all end user focused stuff. >> >> >> That is how I ended up reporting bugs that had been fixed. It >> is a wide >> problem; I mention Xiphos, not as a bad example, but because I >> happened >> to remember the version numbers. >> >> >> The same would be true of Sword. 1.8.1 is not just a bugfix >> release of the 1.8 series. It introduced some minor new >> functionality so, technically, it would not have been permitted >> into the Debian repository if anyone was checking closely. This is >> just how we handle our software, again, because we lack the >> manpower to keep multiple development streams flowing. >> >> I would, again, submit that your issue is actually with your >> chosen distribution. Its documentation appears to be inadequate, >> and it's lulled you into using a distribution that's not targeting >> your use case. You might try running Fedora (or Ubuntu and not >> staying on LTS versions) which have much more generous update >> policies. I can tell you, for instance, that Xiphos compiles very >> nicely on current Fedora versions with a few very simple commands. >> I happen to know this because I maintain both our Xiphos CI >> process and the packages in the repositories for Xiphos. Now, I >> haven't updated the packages to 4.2.1 yet, for Xiphos, because I >> was busy helping with the CI and the release of 4.2.1, but due to >> the CI I know that compiling for Fedora 32 will be a breeze. >> >> Compiling for Ubuntu is a little more of a challenge, because of >> the missing dependencies, but Caleb is working on create a >> dedicated repository on Ubuntu's infrastructure just for that. And >> Caleb, myself, Dom, and Karl are all working to resolve those >> issues so that, in the future, a 4.3 or 4.4 will be able to make >> it back into the Debian repos and eventually into the Ubuntu >> "universe" repositories. >> >> So maybe give us a shot, still, on a distro that's meant for you? :) >> >> --Greg >> >> >> Tom >> >> Tom Sullivan >> i...@beforgiven.info >> FAX: 815-301-2835 >> --------------------- >> >> On 5/13/20 5:21 PM, Greg Hellings wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:57 PM Tom Sullivan >> <i...@beforgiven.info <mailto:i...@beforgiven.info> >> > <mailto:i...@beforgiven.info <mailto:i...@beforgiven.info>>> >> wrote: >> > >> > Y'all: >> > >> > First, I recognize that as a writer and long retired >> developer and >> > engineer (and thus obsolete) that in terms of technical >> issues, I am >> > way >> > out of my league with all you C++ programmers and experts. >> > >> > Second, I want to thank all of you for your hard work. >> Compared to what >> > is available for Windows and Mac users, available Bible >> software and >> > tools are sparse. You work as volunteers and on a >> shoestring budget. >> > Very many thanks. Without your work, I would be back to >> books and paper >> > without being able to search, compare versions, etc., >> with such ease. >> > Linux users are definitely an under served people group >> and you fill a >> > big need. >> > >> > Some of you may remember my SwordHammer project. >> Frankly, it has >> > crashed >> > and burned. Due to an architecture decision that was not >> the best, it >> > became unwieldy. And now, due to changes in my life, I >> cannot continue, >> > though I had started on a new architecture. This has two >> consequences: >> > 1. There probably is not any longer reason to continue >> on this list >> > much >> > longer. >> > 2. I got an appreciation for the huge problem caused by >> incompatible >> > Linux distros. For example, I did not know that Ubuntu >> users were >> > limited to sudo, instead of being able to run as root. >> > >> > Many of my previous interactions with this list have >> been caused by my >> > use of obsolete versions. I cannot help it. I seem only >> able to install >> > packages from the Debian repository (or download a *.deb >> suitable for >> > Debian Buster and install). I recently tried to compile >> and install >> > Sword (which worked), BibleTime (which crashed), and >> Xiphos (which I >> > was >> > not able to compile by various tries.) There are errors >> in the docs, >> > and >> > discrepancies between docs, and who knows what.) I >> failed. So I am >> > stuck, and that is not mainly your fault. The problem is >> that there is >> > no Linux-wide packaging or installation system. It may >> or may not be >> > technically feasible, I don't know). When things go >> wrong, I often have >> > no idea how to fix them. >> > >> > >> > You really shouldn't have to download any files. You should >> only have to >> > run "sudo apt update && sudo apt install bibletime". Or, if >> you want to >> > compile BibleTime from source but use the packaged Sword >> library, "sudo >> > apt install libsword-dev". Currently, Xiphos is not >> compatible with >> > Debian/Ubuntu because it depends on ancient libraries that >> are not >> > available in those distributions anymore. However, packagers >> for those >> > distros, until recently, were maintaining a heavily patched >> version of >> > Xiphos that was avilable in their repositories. All that was >> needed was >> > "sudo apt install xiphos". No downloading or building or >> manually >> > finding dependencies. >> > >> > >> > So I have two suggestions here, but let me start with an >> analogy. >> > When I >> > have to buy a new vehicle, my concern is not if the seat >> is nice and >> > the >> > radio works and the vanity light works. I want it to >> safely take me >> > where I want to go. If there is a rip in the seat or >> dents in the body >> > or some rust or something, I can live with that. So, I >> am willing to >> > live with what is in the repositories and not waste >> everybody else's >> > time with bug reports. I apologize for doing that. It >> was not >> > intentional, but that is what happened. >> > >> > Suggestion 1: Clean up documentation. Prime exhibit: May >> Crosswire page >> > refers to Sword 1.8.0 with link for months with no >> mention of 1.8.1. >> > >> > >> > I'm not sure where you're looking. This is the download page >> for Sword >> > source http://crosswire.org/sword/develop/index.jsp and it >> mentions >> > 1.8.1 without incident. >> > >> > >> > Suggestion 2: For the more popular distros, provide >> ready-to-go >> > packages, .deb files (or equivalent, such as .rpm) for >> installs and >> > updates, even if they do not hit the repositories until >> later. This >> > will >> > get users access who are not experts. In my opinion, for >> what it is >> > worth, this is at least as important as new features. >> Also allow users >> > an option to automatically check for updates and tell >> where to get a >> > new >> > package. I understand that this takes time and work. I >> would rather get >> > some new features and bug fixes, and be able to get and >> use them, than >> > new features I will never see because I can't compile or >> something. I >> > rather think that others are also in my position as well. >> > >> > >> > This is usually a Very Bad Idea for upstream projects. Every >> distro has >> > its own quirks, foibles, and differences. For instance, >> gtkhtml is still >> > avilable on Fedora but not on Ubuntu or Debian. As such, >> Xiphos can be >> > compiled rather readily on Fedora but not on Debian/Ubuntu >> without heavy >> > patching of the source to disable the editor features. Those >> are details >> > already managed by the packagers of those distributions and >> are quite a >> > nightmare for every upstream project to keep track of. Nor >> is it easy to >> > keep separate the very tiny tweaks that make up the Debian >> -> Ubuntu -> >> > Mint/Pop/etc food chain where downstream distributions >> consume upstream >> > packages in some manner. Providing a build is not something >> upstream >> > projects like Sword ought to do. >> > >> > Should our docs be updated so that they work in those >> distros, where >> > possible? Yes. But it sounds like most of your difficulty >> was with the >> > package manager on the Debian (or Ubuntu?) system you were >> using. For an >> > end user, you should have just "sudo apt install <my >> pacage>" and been >> > able to get along without trouble. The fact you weren't was >> a failure on >> > the part of the distribution. Not on Sword, Crosswire, >> BibleTime, or >> > Xiphos. I have no idea what your ultimate goal is, though, >> so I can't >> > give you more particular details than that. >> > >> > --Greg >> > >> > >> > For what it is worth, and sorry it is so long. Sorry >> again for wasting >> > all your time in the past. God bless you and keep up all >> the good work. >> > It is not perfect, but it is definitely good and I use >> your stuff many >> > hours a week and every day. >> > >> > Sincerely, >> > Tom Sullivan >> > >> > -- >> > Tom Sullivan >> > i...@beforgiven.info >> > FAX: 815-301-2835 >> > --------------------- >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org >> <mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org> >> > <mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org >> <mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org>> >> > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at >> above page >> > >> > >> > >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email >> Security.cloud service. >> > For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com >> > >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org >> <mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org> >> > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org >> <mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org> >> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org >> <mailto:sword-devel@crosswire.org> >> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org >> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel >> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page > > > _______________________________________________ > sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org > http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel > Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page > _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
