MX Linux Forum

anticapitalista wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:52 pm I have tried to build it on antiX buster, but failed.
I have been able to build it for testing/sid.

Thanks for the heads up anti.

By chance do you have the failed build log to PM to me? I guess I’ll find out next week one way or another.

anticapitalista wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:52 pm I have tried to build it on antiX buster, but failed.
I have been able to build it for testing/sid.

Thanks a lot anticapitalista.
Do you have an Idea when it will be available in the MX 19.2 KDE Repo Test?
Best regards

joejac wrote: Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:45 pm

anticapitalista wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:52 pm I have tried to build it on antiX buster, but failed.
I have been able to build it for testing/sid.

Thanks a lot anticapitalista.
Do you have an Idea when it will be available in the MX 19.2 KDE Repo Test?
Best regards

anticapitalista is the lead developer for antiX, they won’t be packaging it for MX. I maintain Cherrytree for MX.

I said I will get to it next week, maybe I can do it Sunday, won’t know if time will free up until then. One of the other package maintainers can do it if they want, but we all volunteer for this stuff.

joejac wrote: Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:45 pm Do you have an Idea when it will be available in the MX 19.2 KDE Repo Test?
Best regards

I ran through several failed builds using the 0.99.14 release, nothing jumped out in the build log as something we can fix directly.

That being said, I am watching the Cherrytree GitHub, there are updates every few days.

I'll try and do a build off of the GitHub master sometime soon (time permitted) unless another release is done, then I'll do a newer release, but I won't chase as fast moving application.
If the next build fails I will post an issue on GitHub to let the developer know and see if the build issues can be identified.

Hello,
Is there any news on this subject?.
Thank you.

joejac wrote: Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:44 am Hello,
Is there any news on this subject?.
Thank you.

I wrote to the author about the build failure for the latest release. He writes back

Unfortunately we have few dependencies that require minimum Ubuntu 20.04 / Debian unstable, there is no way to get around that. ... I will make a flatpak soon so it will run everywhere

I pointed out to him that flatpaks can have some serious problems with startup time due to a font cache building bug (I forget where), not for everything, but for some things for sure. I don't think that convinced him to change his mind. I would look at a diff-ing all the files into the currently building version. In my mind, there's nothing that requires new libraries from Debian unstable. I'm more interested in bug fixes and feature advances in formatting. Try the Meld software for that purpose.

We've also been able to backport certain python 3 modules in the past, so all isn't lost for sure.

OKie wrote: Wed Oct 21, 2020 10:54 am I would look at a diff-ing all the files into the currently building version. In my mind, there's nothing that requires new libraries from Debian unstable. I'm more interested in bug fixes and feature advances in formatting. Try the Meld software for that purpose.

That won’t work, the difference is that Cherrytree is going from a python2 application to a C based application.

I’m looking at the build failure to determine if build and runtime dependencies can be backported as well, but there is a chance they cannot if it depends on for example an updated libc In order to build which is what it looks like so far.

They don't list the minimum build dependencies in their internal debian/control file, but must somewhere in a cmake file. Right now, the first thing that makes it error out is "Requested 'glibmm-2.4 >= 2.64' but version of glibmm is 2.58.0". Debian testing has 2.64.2, but there's no saying yet if that would need the whole GTK 3 framework backported also.

Thanks for the updates to everybody.
I can see is going to take some time to have it working.
I will wait.
Thank you for your efforts.
Regards