[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Help request] packaging pyne 1.0.3 - build problem



Am Donnerstag, den 26.05.2005, 20:15 +0200 schrieb Andreas Fester:
> 
> [...]
> >>RuntimeError: could not open display
> >>configure: error: GTK+ version >= (2,0,0) required
> >>make: *** [config.status] Error 1
> [...]
> > My guess is that you are logged in as a normal user and running debuild as 
> > root, am I right?

BTW: No. I am logged in as user and I also run debuild as user.

> > In that case, it appears to be complaining about being 
> > unable to connect to an X server.
> > 
> > But I could be wrong :)
> 
> your guess is absolutely right, but its not only a security issue: the
> DISPLAY variable is also not set. I could build the package by granting
> access to the XServer (xhost) *and* setting the DISPLAY variable to :0.0
> in the configure script (export DISPLAY=:0.0).
> But, you still need a running X-Server, so this is probably no solution
> for the build environment.

Ok. So my idea was right.

> The X-Server connecton is needed by the checks for the gtk and the pygtk
> version, starting with "import gtk" in configure.in . Maybe you could
> rewrite these checks so that they do not need the X-Server connection.

I found a workaround using pkg-config and checking for pygtk-2.0, so the
package also builds in pbuilder-CHROOT. Because I found much more
build-issues, I will suggest these changes to the upstream author.

> BTW: Your package depends on autoconf and you also call autoconf
> when building the package; usually this should not be necessary,
> the proper configure script should be provided, i.e. if you need
> to rebuild the configure script then add the diff for the script
> to your already existing 01_fix_build_issues.dpat.

I don't like this solution. I know, it's one probable way of handling
this issue (besides the one suggested
in /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian). If upstream accepts my
changes, I will not longer need to patch configure.in.

Regards, Daniel



Reply to: