[PD] Building pd-l2ork on arch linux 64

[Ivica Ico Bukvic]

Thanks for all your hard work! Please see comments below.

 

From: pd-list-bounces at iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces at iem.at] On Behalf Of
Fero Kiraly
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 8:53 AM
To: pd-list at iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] Building pd-l2ork on arch linux 64

 

Ivica,

 

I have good message ! pd-l2ork has been completely build on arch 64 from my
new PKGBUILD.

it has this last problem:

If I want to install it to the system it complies about this:

 

 

error: failed to commit transaction (conflicting files)

pd-l2ork: /usr/bin/cyclist exists in filesystem

pd-l2ork: /usr/bin/pdreceive exists in filesystem

pd-l2ork: /usr/bin/pdsend exists in filesystem

pd-l2ork: /usr/share/man/man1/pdreceive.1.gz exists in filesystem

pd-l2ork: /usr/share/man/man1/pdsend.1.gz exists in filesystem

 

That is because both versions include these files. My understanding is that
pd-extended packages this as a separate package pd-utils. How to handle this
is not clear. For right now it is a conflict (as it should be) since both
packages provide the same binary.

 

 

all of the errors are conflicting files from pd-extended.

If I uninstall pd-extended, everything goes well and I have functional
pd-l2ork in the system.

How to resolve this ?

 

For right now exactly as you did, or install pd-l2ork using binary installer
into /usr/local. Pd-extended does not support this as far as I could tell
(it only supports install in /usr folder), so you would have to install
pd-l2ork this way.

 

next.. you have resolved problem with gem2pdp, but I have to run aclocal in
this folder separately before building process, because in your script is
only

cd gem2pdp && autoconf

something changed ?

 

Wait, are you saying that if you:

 

cd externals/

make gem2pdp

 

this fails unless you manually run aclocal?

 

and finally I have to patch the pd/src/configure.in for tcl/tk8.6, and I
think it could be added officially

here is the patch file:

 

Thanks for providing the patch. Does this mess with older versions, namely
8.5 or does this script work for both?

 

 

 

*** configure.in        2013-01-23 19:46:22.000000000 +0100

--- configure.in.new   2013-01-23 19:54:57.476420874 +0100

***************

*** 149,154 ****

--- 149,155 ----

  #    exit -1

  fi

  

+ AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.6, main,,

  AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl85, main,,

          AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.5, main,,

          AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl84, main,,

***************

*** 156,171 ****

                  AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.3, main,,

                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.2, main,,

                                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.0, main,,

!                             echo no tcl library found; exit 1)))))))

  

  AC_CHECK_LIB(tk85, main,,

!         AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.5, main,,

         AC_CHECK_LIB(tk84, main,,

              AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.4, main,,

                  AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.3, main,,

                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.2, main,,

                                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.0, main,,

!                             echo no tk library found; exit 1)))))))

  

  

  if test x$tk != "xno"; then

--- 157,173 ----

                  AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.3, main,,

                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.2, main,,

                                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tcl8.0, main,,

!                             echo no tcl library found; exit 1))))))))

  

+ AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.6, main,,

  AC_CHECK_LIB(tk85, main,,

!     AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.5, main,,

         AC_CHECK_LIB(tk84, main,,

              AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.4, main,,

                  AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.3, main,,

                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.2, main,,

                                      AC_CHECK_LIB(tk8.0, main,,

!                             echo no tk library found; exit 1))))))))

  

  

 

fk.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20130127/65a12016/attachment.htm>