Re: qtcups_2.0-4
On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Faheem Mitha wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, john gennard wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:14:29AM -0400, Faheem Mitha wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, john gennard wrote:
> > >
> > > > I run Potato 2.2 r3 on a PC with a 2.2.18 kernel, and have
> > > > tried to install the above using 'apt-get source -b qtcups' ( I
> > > > have a 'deb-src http' in my sources.list). This failed, ending with
> > > > the following error message:-
> > > [snipped]
>
> I managed to compile qtcups 2.0-3 (from woody) on potato without any
> problems. I installed it and it seems to be behaving normally. My
> immediate reaction is that there is something wrong with the version of
> qtcups in unstable. Suggestion: try to compile the version of qtcups in
> woody and see how it goes. Packages in unstable are often buggy and are
> generally best avoided. For example, I could not even build the cups in
> unstable, though the cups in testing compiled with no problem (and this
> definitely was not a dependencies issue). If you find the version of
> qtcups in testing builds with no problem I suggest filing a bug report
> against the version in unstable.
I spoke too soon. I tried compiling 2.0.4 and it compiled with no
problem.
> If this still does not work, note that I used versions of qt from
> debian.kde.net ie
>
> ii libqt-dev 2.3.0-final-0. Qt GUI development headers, static
> libraries
>
> ii libqt2 2.3.0-final-0. Qt GUI Library (runtime version).
>
> Put deb http://kde.debian.net potato main crypto optional in sources.list,
> refresh, and try getting libqt-dev. But I doubt this is the problem.
This seems like the only thing left to point the finger at. If you upgrade
libqt-dev, you might as well upgrade libqt2 for good measure, even if it
doesn't do so automatically, just to make sure. Then try again. If it does
not work this time, I don't know what is going on.
Note that apt might insist that you download bits of kde along with the qt
libs. This happened to me, though I don't see why.
Sincerely, Faheem Mitha.
Reply to: