trinity-users@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: June 2014

Re: [trinity-users] libogg0 conflicts with libogg0:i386 under ubuntu precise

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 19:06:55 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA224

> On Tuesday 03 of June 2014 22:34:54 Timothy Pearson wrote:
>> > Timothy Pearson wrote:
>> >>> On Tuesday 18 of September 2012 17:23:19 Timothy Pearson wrote:
>> >>>>> Dne út 18. září 2012 Slávek Banko napsal(a):
>> >>>>> I can confirm that in the Packages downloaded from the apt sources
>> >>>>
>> >>>> from
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> PPA really missing information: Multi-Arch: same. Although in
>> >>>>> packages
>> >>>>> this information is provided.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> This would seem to be a Launchpad bug; not sure if it has been
>> fixed
>> >>>> (or
>> >>>> even reported!) upstream.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Note: I noticed that for R14 is dependency libogg-dev-la replaced
>> to
>> >>>>> libogg-dev. Tim, please, it caused some complications? It can also
>> be
>> >>>>> used for 3.5.13.1?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I have not yet completed an R14 rebuild set with the dependency
>> >>>> changed;
>> >>>> I
>> >>>> still expect some packages to fail and require patching.
>> >>>
>> >>> please, what tool is used by Launchpad to generate apt sources
>> >>> informations?
>> >>> It would be possible to update only this tool?
>> >>>
>> >>> Slavek
>> >>
>> >> The proper solution is to remove the broken libogg package from the
>> >> build-dependencies repository.  I still have not completed a full
>> build
>> >> test with libogg-dev-la removed, so I don't know if this is feasible
>> >> yet.
>> >
>> > Now that we're on this topic. Does Trinity also really need its own
>> > python-sip (and python-sip-dbg) packages?
>> >
>> > http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=1012
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Julius
>>
>> Dreding up an ancient thread here since I got bitten by this bug two
>> years
>> later...
>>
>> It seems that there was a time when the official Ubuntu Precise
>> multiarch
>> buildroots were broken, and the only symptom was multiarch failures such
>> as this one.  A simple binary rebuild against the new buildroot seems to
>> have resolved the problem on my end:
>> https://quickbuild.pearsoncomputing.net/~trinity/+archive/trinity-nightly-b
>>uild-dependencies/+sourcepub/84880/+listing-archive-extra
>>
>> Tim
>>
>
> I thought that it has been verified that there is no need to hold own
> libogg,
> and that it can be smoothly removed from build-deps. Is there a reason for
> package libogg-dev-la?
>
> --
> Slavek

Honestly I don't remember.  If there are no deps then I'll go ahead and
remove it.

Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iFYEARELAAYFAlOOYx8ACgkQLaxZSoRZrGGT9ADgkznvAg5mULQW+TTy+bR1VpFJ
Kv29JSBM3FOpRADePlPqsMcqoP0g+T1gMpQ7iaYBvN0+qx2SgqaZ6Q==
=B47w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----