LinuxQuestions.org - [SOLVED] digikam fails to compile

- Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)

- - digikam fails to compile (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/digikam-fails-to-compile-4175455794/)

Fails at the very end with this error

Code:

-- Installing: /tmp/build/package-digikam/usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/kipiplugin_advancedslideshow.mo

-- Installing: /tmp/build/package-digikam/usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/kipiplugin_flashexport.mo

-- Installing: /tmp/build/package-digikam/usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/kipiplugin_gpssync.mo

-- Installing: /tmp/build/package-digikam/usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/libkipi.mo

-- Installing: /tmp/build/package-digikam/usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/kipiplugin_metadataedit.mo

-- Installing: /tmp/build/package-digikam/usr/share/locale/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES/kipiplugin_batchprocessimages.mo

cat: /home/xxx/Downloads/digikam/digikam.SlackBuild: No such file or directory

That's another 3 hours I'll never get back again.

Please don't take this the wrong way as I have a great deal of both sympathy and admiration for those who have the time to build from source, including sharing their findings with the wider user base, so many thanks for that.
But I've just grabbed the wifes lappy, and the whole process has taken less than 10 minutes thanks to dependency resolution and a much more widely tested software repository, so am currently using that for my photo management and being able to use the computer for what it's designed for rather than spend hours unproductively waiting for compiling/building only to see it fail is almost pushing me to another distro after more than 8 years of using Slackware. So frustrating that it should all be so difficult and long winded in the 21st century.

By any chance, did you rename the digikam.SlackBuild to another name?

I have found that installations of Digikam and Amarok have failed if I use 'sudo make install' for example instead of 'su' then 'make install'.

If you use slackbuilds, it's supposed to be run using su or su - not sudo

I think he builds and installs directly from source (and I'm wondering how he manages to remove old stuff when he needs to upgrade).

Quote:

Originally Posted by willysr (Post 4922493)

By any chance, did you rename the digikam.SlackBuild to another name?

Just guessing based on my own experience, but still hoping it helps vdemuth to track the problem down.

In my experience 9 out of ten such problems are caused by wrong file access mode or user privileges. Just guessing, but did you take into account that digikam.SlackBuild is one of the following?

1. It is readable and has to be called this way:

Code:

$ su -c "sh digikam.SlackBuild"

OR that it is

2. It is readable and executable and thus can alternatively called like so:

Code:

su -c "./digikam.SlackBuild"

Sometimes obsolete stuff in /tmp may cause trouble, so ensure to wipe all stuff related to building digikam from there. Finally, I occasionally had problems on multilib systems, when the build script picked 32-bit libraries, although it was supposed to pick 64-bit stuff. In the last case the only reliable (!) workaround I found was to build the package on a pure 64-bit system and transfer the binary package to the target machine.

gargamel

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponce (Post 4922563)

I think he builds and installs directly from source (and I'm wondering how he manages to remove old stuff when he needs to upgrade).

Yeah, part of his posts seems to suggest this, but then in the error output he has:

Code:

cat: /home/xxx/Downloads/digikam/digikam.SlackBuild: No such file or directory

Building directly from source wouldn't yield this message, I guess... ;)

gargamel

My only assumption during the process it was moved, deleted, or renamed by other process or he renamed it before the compilation start

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponce (Post 4922563)

I think he builds and installs directly from source (and I'm wondering how he manages to remove old stuff when he needs to upgrade).

How wrong you are:)

Quote:

By any chance, did you rename the digikam.SlackBuild to another name?

Anyway, can't believe I made such a fundamental error, and managed to name the SlackBuild as Slackbuild without the capitalised B.

All up and running now.

Still stand by what I said about things really ought to be simpler in the 21st Century:), but happy it's resolved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vdemuth (Post 4922824)

How wrong you are:)

sorry if I wasn't clear, I was responding to willysr following the post by Bazzaah.

Apologies for the mix up this end.

no prob at all, I should have specified that I was referring to him ;) (also gargamel thought I was referring to you)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ponce (Post 4922563)

I think he builds and installs directly from source (and I'm wondering how he manages to remove old stuff when he needs to upgrade).

Less than ideal but I tend just to delete the executable from /usr/bin - a messed up kind of reinstall. That said, the few programs I compile myself work very well and I don't get any error messages so it can't be that bad.

I should learn how to write a couple of SlackBuilds - that would be cleaner and make for easier maintenance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bazzaah (Post 4922921)

Let me say I wouldn't count on it at all ;)
This way you will have old versions of stuff (libraries and whatever else get installed besides the binaries) laying around your filesystem and many strange and unexpected things can happen, not to say that it's very difficult to recover a clean installation from this situation.

If you prefer to have a clean system, use only slackbuild scripts to create packages and install those.

I take your points 100% but I only compile Digikam and Clementine so I'm not too worried, most (out of not many) installations I do through sbopkg.

What's the best SlackBuilds tut in your opinion?