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

Bug#914634: marked as done (texlive-binaries: luatex requires libEGL)



Your message dated Sun, 25 Nov 2018 22:24:47 +0100
with message-id <bfdf0f8b-7c95-bb08-1be0-2626ca8ffe2b@web.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#914634: Sorry for the noise
has caused the Debian Bug report #914634,
regarding texlive-binaries: luatex requires libEGL
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
914634: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=914634
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: texlive-binaries
Version: 2016.20160513.41080.dfsg-2+deb9u1
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

While doing automated builds using the openbuildservice to rebuild quilt from stretch-backports,
I have encountered a failing maintainer script of tex-common.

Investigating the produced log-file shows that the luatex application attempts to load libEGL.so.1, and fails:
luatex: error while loading shared libraries: libEGL.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

Sure enough in the produced build-root nothing has pulled in libegl1.
I suspect that the texlive-binaries package should have a dependency on libegl1.

I will attach the full logs to a reply.

Yours sincerely
Josua Mayer


-- System Information:
Debian Release: 9.6
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: armhf (armv7l)

Kernel: Linux 4.9.124-imx6-sr (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages texlive-binaries depends on:
ii  dpkg              1.18.25
ii  libc6             2.24-11+deb9u3
ii  libcairo2         1.14.8-1sr1
ii  libfontconfig1    2.11.0-6.7+b1
ii  libfreetype6      2.6.3-3.2
ii  libgcc1           1:6.3.0-18+deb9u1
ii  libgmp10          2:6.1.2+dfsg-1
ii  libgraphite2-3    1.3.10-1
ii  libgs9            9.25~dfsg-0+deb9u1
ii  libharfbuzz-icu0  1.4.2-1
ii  libharfbuzz0b     1.4.2-1
ii  libice6           2:1.0.9-2
ii  libicu57          57.1-6+deb9u2
ii  libkpathsea6      2016.20160513.41080.dfsg-2+deb9u1
ii  libmpfr4          3.1.5-1
ii  libpaper1         1.1.24+nmu5
ii  libpixman-1-0     0.34.0-1
ii  libpng16-16       1.6.28-1
ii  libpoppler64      0.48.0-2+deb9u2
ii  libpotrace0       1.13-3
ii  libptexenc1       2016.20160513.41080.dfsg-2+deb9u1
ii  libsm6            2:1.2.2-1+b3
ii  libstdc++6        6.3.0-18+deb9u1
ii  libsynctex1       2016.20160513.41080.dfsg-2+deb9u1
ii  libtexlua52       2016.20160513.41080.dfsg-2+deb9u1
ii  libtexluajit2     2016.20160513.41080.dfsg-2+deb9u1
ii  libx11-6          2:1.6.4-3+deb9u1
ii  libxaw7           2:1.0.13-1+b2
ii  libxext6          2:1.3.3-1+b2
ii  libxi6            2:1.7.9-1
ii  libxmu6           2:1.1.2-2
ii  libxpm4           1:3.5.12-1
ii  libxt6            1:1.1.5-1
ii  libzzip-0-13      0.13.62-3.1
ii  perl              5.24.1-3+deb9u4
ii  t1utils           1.39-2
ii  tex-common        6.06
ii  zlib1g            1:1.2.8.dfsg-5

Versions of packages texlive-binaries recommends:
ii  python        2.7.13-2
ii  ruby          1:2.3.3
ii  texlive-base  2016.20170123-5
ii  tk [wish]     8.6.0+9

texlive-binaries suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 25.11.18 21:32, Josua Mayer wrote:

> I might have noticed what is going wrong on my side :( I did some evil
> dependency mangling about libegl1.
> So please close this report!
> 
Doing so. Thanks!

Hilmar
-- 
sigfault
#206401 http://counter.li.org

--- End Message ---

Reply to: