Hmmm... I have used autopackages on Slackware (10.0, and I think 11.0) in the past, with no trouble at all, unless I had a file dependency problem. My current install of .46 came from slacky.eu. I did have to chase a few dependencies, but it wasn't all that bad.
The only time I ever really ran into trouble was with that hard to find python dependency (was it numpy?) that was needed to run the effects. Looks like it has since been replaced with something else.
Ubuntu and derivatives I couldn't help you with in any case. I've had nothing but trouble from Ubuntu.
--- On Fri, 4/24/09, Aaron Spike <aaron@...476...> wrote:
From: Aaron Spike <aaron@...476...> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-user] Nightly/Testing Builds To: "inkscape-devel" inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, "Inkscape User Community" inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Friday, April 24, 2009, 8:23 AM Elwin Estle wrote:
How involved is the Linux process? I am familiar with
basic
./configure, make, make install...but that's about
it (I am guessing
this is a bit more complex process?) I think one time
I might have
done something from an SVN tree...can't remember
what it was or if
the process even worked. I have an AMD Athlon machine
running
Slackware 12.2, also a Mac Mini with Leopard.
While we have traditionally favored autopackage because it allowed the work put into making a single package to serve users of many different linux distros, I don't think it is a bad idea to make distro specific packages at this point.
Slackware has always been a distro on which using the autopackage and even just building inkscape have been difficult for people. I'm not sure why as I've never used slackware. Anything you can do to better the situation for slackware users will be much appreciated.
What other distros should we look for packagers for? I believe Ubuntu is already covered by the PPA someone set up. Does fedora have any sort of continuous building system we could make use of? Do other people think contacting the normal distro packagers for platform specific help is appropriate?
Making autopackages is no harder than a typical configure, make process. There are different commands to call, that's all. Now setting up the dependencies and the build configuration is a slightly different story. Autopackaging is complicated by the fact that a single package can serve both the old and current c++ ABI and now even both x86 and x86_64 architectures. Building autopackages requires a willingness to learn about linking and check that libraries are linked properly so as to cause as little trouble as possible. There are also a few places in the codebase where we could use relaytool to make libraries optional at runtime. I think we will require a little bit of help from the autopackage project if we are going to get this service up and running again.
Aaron Spike
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensign option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects _______________________________________________ Inkscape-user mailing list Inkscape-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-user