tar-pax option in configure.ac
Ted,
Myself and others have been having problems building Inkscape since r17648, when you added the option for the tar-pax format in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE. Ubuntu Gutsy, which I'm running, and Fedora Core 6, according to some mailing list traffic, don't have a new enough version of automake in their standard repositories to run ./autogen.sh successfully with that option enabled. Other distributions may be involved, too. Using automake1.8 and removing the tar-pax option get ./autogen.sh to work, and I'm wondering what you would think about rolling back the tar-pax option for now, to ease the problems that users of those operating systems are having with building Inkscape, and then re-enabling it later, when the repositories for those distributions upgrade to the newer automake1.10.
Thanks,
John
I don't know about other distros, but FC6 will never be updated, since it is no longer officially supported. I see that as my tough luck for using an unsupported distro... For now I modify my configure.ac by hand to remove the tar-pax option, which seems to work...
That said, wasn't there some consensus that this requirement could perhaps only be invoked when you actually tried to build a tarball?
-Tom
On Feb 2, 2008 7:35 PM, John Bintz <jcoswell@...1414...> wrote:
Ted,
Myself and others have been having problems building Inkscape since r17648, when you added the option for the tar-pax format in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE. Ubuntu Gutsy, which I'm running, and Fedora Core 6, according to some mailing list traffic, don't have a new enough version of automake in their standard repositories to run ./autogen.sh successfully with that option enabled. Other distributions may be involved, too. Using automake1.8 and removing the tar-pax option get ./autogen.sh to work, and I'm wondering what you would think about rolling back the tar-pax option for now, to ease the problems that users of those operating systems are having with building Inkscape, and then re-enabling it later, when the repositories for those distributions upgrade to the newer automake1.10.
Thanks,
John
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 22:35 -0500, John Bintz wrote:
Myself and others have been having problems building Inkscape since r17648, when you added the option for the tar-pax format in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE. Ubuntu Gutsy, which I'm running, and Fedora Core 6, according to some mailing list traffic, don't have a new enough version of automake in their standard repositories to run ./autogen.sh successfully with that option enabled. Other distributions may be involved, too.
Here's the breakdown of Fedora and Ubuntu: (Gutsy has 1.10)
Fedora 8 -- 1.10 -- http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/8/Fedora/i386/os... Fedora 7 -- 1.10 -- http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/releases/7/Fedora/i386/os... Fedora Core 6 -- 1.9 -- http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/6/i386/os/Fedora/RPM... Fedora Core 5 -- 1.9 -- http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/5/i386/os/Fedora/RPM...
Ubuntu 8.04 -- 1.10 -- http://packages.ubuntu.com/hardy/allpackages Ubuntu 7.10 -- 1.10 -- http://packages.ubuntu.com/gutsy/allpackages Ubuntu 7.04 -- 1.10 -- http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty/allpackages Ubuntu 6.10 -- 1.9 -- http://packages.ubuntu.com/edgy/allpackages Ubuntu 6.06 -- 1.9 -- http://packages.ubuntu.com/dapper/allpackages
Basically anything released newer than 2006 has automake 1.10. For the GTK+ requirements we have we only get more more version of each distro. Both Ubuntu 6.06 and FC 5 have GTK+ 2.8.
Using automake1.8 and removing the tar-pax option get ../autogen.sh to work, and I'm wondering what you would think about rolling back the tar-pax option for now, to ease the problems that users of those operating systems are having with building Inkscape, and then re-enabling it later, when the repositories for those distributions upgrade to the newer automake1.10.
Overall, I'm not greatly concerned about this. I think the only versions of distros that we're leaving in the cold are those which are not supported by their vendors (or very close to be). Perhaps we should do our civic duty to reduce spam by encouraging people to move somewhere there are security updates :)
If we did want to stop using 1.10, I'd really like to know why we're avoiding 1.9. We're specifically blocking the entire released 1.9 series.
--Ted
On Sat, Feb 02, 2008 at 08:50:15PM -0800, Ted Gould wrote:
On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 22:35 -0500, John Bintz wrote:
Myself and others have been having problems building Inkscape since r17648, when you added the option for the tar-pax format in AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE. Ubuntu Gutsy, which I'm running, and Fedora Core 6, according to some mailing list traffic, don't have a new enough version of automake in their standard repositories to run ./autogen.sh successfully with that option enabled. Other distributions may be involved, too.
I gave Ted the original go-ahead to do this change (although I thought it would only affect users invoking 'make dist'), but in reviewing the issues people are having (and the ease with which I've replicated the issues on my own systems), it's clear this change needs to be reverted. The last thing we want to do is insert obstacles for people wishing to compile and contribute to inkscape.
Ted, please revert the tar-pax change for 0.46, or reimplement it such that it imposes the automake 1.10 requirement ONLY when building a tarball. I think the requirement will be acceptable for 0.47.
Bryce
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 02:16 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
I gave Ted the original go-ahead to do this change (although I thought it would only affect users invoking 'make dist'), but in reviewing the issues people are having (and the ease with which I've replicated the issues on my own systems), it's clear this change needs to be reverted. The last thing we want to do is insert obstacles for people wishing to compile and contribute to inkscape.
Really, we're only stopping contributors using Edgy and FC6. Everyone else has been kicked out by the GTK+ requirements already. Not to mention really old versions of things like Cairo.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't reduce the barriers to contribution, but I think in this case the number of users in the delta is very small.
Ted, please revert the tar-pax change for 0.46, or reimplement it such that it imposes the automake 1.10 requirement ONLY when building a tarball. I think the requirement will be acceptable for 0.47.
I don't think there is a way to do this. We either must count all of our file name lengths (include paths) to be 99 characters or less, or require an automake 1.10 or higher.
--Ted
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 08:28:45PM -0800, Ted Gould wrote:
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 02:16 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
I gave Ted the original go-ahead to do this change (although I thought it would only affect users invoking 'make dist'), but in reviewing the issues people are having (and the ease with which I've replicated the issues on my own systems), it's clear this change needs to be reverted. The last thing we want to do is insert obstacles for people wishing to compile and contribute to inkscape.
Really, we're only stopping contributors using Edgy and FC6. Everyone else has been kicked out by the GTK+ requirements already. Not to mention really old versions of things like Cairo.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't reduce the barriers to contribution, but I think in this case the number of users in the delta is very small.
I don't think it's correct that the issue only affects Edgy users; I've been able to see the issue on Gutsy (and I think Hardy as well). The error message it generates mentions tar-pax but does not give a hint that upgrading automake would solve it.
Ted, please revert the tar-pax change for 0.46, or reimplement it such that it imposes the automake 1.10 requirement ONLY when building a tarball. I think the requirement will be acceptable for 0.47.
I don't think there is a way to do this. We either must count all of our file name lengths (include paths) to be 99 characters or less, or require an automake 1.10 or higher.
The former option seems to be the safest and least hassle solution, and is the one I think we should go with for 0.46.
Bryce
On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 20:45 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 08:28:45PM -0800, Ted Gould wrote:
Really, we're only stopping contributors using Edgy and FC6. Everyone else has been kicked out by the GTK+ requirements already. Not to mention really old versions of things like Cairo.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't reduce the barriers to contribution, but I think in this case the number of users in the delta is very small.
I don't think it's correct that the issue only affects Edgy users; I've been able to see the issue on Gutsy (and I think Hardy as well).
If that was the case the PPAs wouldn't build correctly. As you know (and others may not so I'm explaining) the PPAs are VERY strict versions of the various distributions which are built up for the sole purpose of that single build and then discarded. It's nearly impossible to add additional packages that aren't in the archives for those releases.
The error message it generates mentions tar-pax but does not give a hint that upgrading automake would solve it.
I think this is because I forgot to change the version number in the required section, but instead later on in the file. I believe that, by changing it in the required section the error message would be correct.
Ted, please revert the tar-pax change for 0.46, or reimplement it such that it imposes the automake 1.10 requirement ONLY when building a tarball. I think the requirement will be acceptable for 0.47.
I don't think there is a way to do this. We either must count all of our file name lengths (include paths) to be 99 characters or less, or require an automake 1.10 or higher.
The former option seems to be the safest and least hassle solution, and is the one I think we should go with for 0.46.
Your patch ;)
--Ted
Ted,
so is this resolved? I had to upgrade automake to 1.9.6 to make it work with the new option, but now I still can't get autogen to run:
checking for automake >= 1.10 ... Too old (found version 1.9.6)!
should I downgrade it to 1.8 again?
I am building happily with 1.9.6 after making the following change to my autogen.sh. I'm not sure what 1.10 is required for...
Index: autogen.sh =================================================================== --- autogen.sh (revision 17338) +++ autogen.sh (working copy) @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ FILE=inkscape.spec.in
AUTOCONF_REQUIRED_VERSION=2.52 -AUTOMAKE_REQUIRED_VERSION=1.10 +AUTOMAKE_REQUIRED_VERSION=1.9.6 GLIB_REQUIRED_VERSION=2.0.0 INTLTOOL_REQUIRED_VERSION=0.17
On Feb 13, 2008 5:03 PM, bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
Ted,
so is this resolved? I had to upgrade automake to 1.9.6 to make it work with the new option, but now I still can't get autogen to run:
checking for automake >= 1.10 ... Too old (found version 1.9.6)!
should I downgrade it to 1.8 again?
-- bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Inkscape-devel mailing list Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:09:02 -0800, "Tom Davidson" <tjd@...1007...> wrote:
I am building happily with 1.9.6 after making the following change to my autogen.sh. I'm not sure what 1.10 is required for...
The 1.9.x series had some bugs which we were hitting; the bugs have not been fixed (1.9 is obsolete), but perhaps the code that was triggering the bugs is no more.
-mental
why don't we simply remove the tar-pax option from non-package-building Makefile targets?
Potentially new contributors may have unnecessary difficulties when trying to compile.
Juca
and they probably won't read this mail thread.
On Feb 14, 2008 12:23 AM, Felipe Sanches <felipe.sanches@...400...> wrote:
why don't we simply remove the tar-pax option from non-package-building Makefile targets?
Potentially new contributors may have unnecessary difficulties when trying to compile.
Juca
On Thu, 2008-02-14 at 00:23 -0200, Felipe Sanches wrote:
why don't we simply remove the tar-pax option from non-package-building Makefile targets?
I don't know how to do this, do you? I believe that it's impossible. Automake checks through the configure.ac file in autogen.sh to ensure that it can handle all the options.
Potentially new contributors may have unnecessary difficulties when trying to compile.
I believe there are very few people in this case that have the required GTK+ 2.10.
--Ted
I am on Gutsy and I was also hit by this problem. The point is that configure or autogen (I have no idea) tries to use automake 1.8 when it's available. If automake 1.10 and automake 1.8 are both installed on the system, autogen will try to use the 1.8 version, and the build will fail. A probable source of error is tools-version.sh in the main directory of the tree, but I'm not sure.
Regards, Krzysztof Kosiński
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:03:37 -0400, "bulia byak" <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
so is this resolved? I had to upgrade automake to 1.9.6 to make it work with the new option, but now I still can't get autogen to run:
checking for automake >= 1.10 ... Too old (found version 1.9.6)!
should I downgrade it to 1.8 again?
I hit this recently. The real answer is to upgrade to 1.10, which appears to be the version that most distros' "plain" automake package is at (versus automake1.8, automake1.9, etc.).
-mental
Ted Gould wrote:
Here's the breakdown of Fedora and Ubuntu: (Gutsy has 1.10)
Ubuntu 7.10 -- 1.10 -- http://packages.ubuntu.com/gutsy/allpackages
OK, now I see what's up...all of the different automake versions available had confused me, and I didn't have the latest one (1.10, the straight automake package) installed. When autogen.sh saw that I had both 1.9.x and 1.8 on the same system, it stopped the process at the 1.9.x bit and didn't try to fall back to 1.8. Thanks for clearing that up. :)
Overall, I'm not greatly concerned about this. I think the only versions of distros that we're leaving in the cold are those which are not supported by their vendors (or very close to be). Perhaps we should do our civic duty to reduce spam by encouraging people to move somewhere there are security updates :)
Works for me. ;)
If we did want to stop using 1.10, I'd really like to know why we're avoiding 1.9. We're specifically blocking the entire released 1.9 series.
It looks like it's an issue when compiling Inkscape on a system with MMX optimizations enabled:
http://www.sourceware.org/ml/automake-prs/2005-q3/msg00005.html
Take care,
John
participants (8)
-
Bryce Harrington -
bulia byak -
Felipe Sanches -
John Bintz -
Krzysztof Kosiński -
MenTaLguY -
Ted Gould -
Tom Davidson