Re: glibc warnings

Justin Karneges <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.autopackage.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wednesday 28 November 2007 2:13 am, Taj Morton wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2007 2:07 AM, Isak Savo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 2007/11/28, Justin Karneges <[email protected]>:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm trying to build all of our deps with apbuild (openssl, zlib, Qt4),
> > > and I've mostly succeeded.  I can makepackage a test application using
> > > QtCore and it succeeds without warnings.  However, when I use QtGui,
> > > then I'm given this:
> >
> > Do you really need to ship Qt? I think it is better to link
> > dynamically to QT and use whatever version the user already has on his
> > system. That way this problem will go away.
> > zlib is also a system library that all users already have (gzip
> > depends on it, and so does a lot of other base tools). No need to
> > build and ship it - just link dynamically.
>
> Qt4 should still be shipped/statically linked as it's still uncommon.
> This will change when KDE 4 comes out, but for now, I think shipping
> it is the best approach.
>
> When I was packaging a Qt 4 app, I ended up building a custom Qt with
> apgcc. It's not that hard to do--edit the linux-g++ mkspec from the
> source tarball and change all the "g++"s to "apg++", and all the
> "gcc"s to "apgcc"s. I'm pretty sure that using an apbuild compiled
> version of Qt got rid of the errors for me.

Yep, I just changed the mkspec and built.  Is there any way to inspect which 
module might have the too-new glibc symbols?  It is possible my Qt is fine, 
and it is rather the X11 libs that have the symbols, but I don't know how to 
determine this conclusively.

> > OpenSSL is bad to ship because it is a security library and if you
> > ship it, the user won't benefit from the system upgrades.
>
> Most distros have it, no?

Certainly most do.  However, I don't know if it has reached the point where we 
can blindly assume it is present, like we can with libz.  (As an aside, given 
that free software people still argue about the OpenSSL license, I can easily 
see a situation where a distro might not have it (or at least not out of the 
box), even if I can't name any such distros off the top of my head...)

-Justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: autopackage-dev-unsubscribe-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: autopackage-dev-help-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.