a few weeks ago I updated xz-5.4.5

when I recompile the gegl-0.2.2 slackbuild i got this:
/usr/bin/sed: can't read /usr/lib64/liblzma.la: No such file or directory
libtool: error: '/usr/lib64/liblzma.la' is not a valid libtool archive

even the exellent LFS site does not talk about a dependency of xz for gegl.
https://lfs.lug.org.cn/blfs/view/7.9/general/gegl.html

It's a convention of BLFS that packages which form part of LFS do not count as dependencies. That's because all the packages in LFS are compulsory. It's like complaining that a slackbuild did not mention something that is part of the Slackware installation image.

3 members found this post helpful.

how does this correlate with the title?

1 members found this post helpful.

Have you perhaps got some errant .la files lurking in /usr/lib64 that shouldn't be there?

edit:
gegl-0.2.2? Actually, that's really old, what are you running? If you're trying to use a "post .la removal" xz slackbuild on a "pre .la removal" slackware I'm not surprised you're having difficulties.


CRUX do the same. Anything in 'core' does not get listed as a dependency of any of the optional packages.

my god the Slackware gurus always have an answer for everything

https://distrowatch.com/table.php?di...n=12.0#pkglist

GazL
LQ Veteran

my intel gpu is no longer supported beyond kernel 4.4 (that's why I'm staying with Slackware64 14.2 and a old gegl-0.2.2)

# Don't ship .la files:
# rm -f $PKG/{,usr/}lib${LIBDIRSUFFIX}/*.la
in xz Slackbuild solved the problem

but it was finding XZ as a dependency for GEGL that really surprised me.

Where did you get 'the gegl-0.2.2 slackbuild'? If you wrote it yourself, you should know what you were doing with sed and liblzma.la. Slackware never had it: gegl-0.2.0 was upgraded to gegl-0.4.0 May 1 2018 (-current between 14.2 and 15.0). It's now gegl-0.4.46 in 15.0.

And, Apr 19 2018, in a Mass Rebuild, /usr/lib64 got rid of all .la files.

1 members found this post helpful.

I don't know about your gegl-0.2.2 but gegl-0.2.0-x86_64-4_slack14.2 does not link against liblzma.so.5, if that's what you think.

/usr/lib64/gegl-0.2/svg-load.so does not link against liblzma.so.5 but it links against librsvg-2.so.2.

And then, librsvg-2.so.2 of package librsvg-2.40.20-x86_64-1_slack14.2 does link against liblzma.so.5.

I agree, Slackware is an excellent learning distribution. With it, you have easy access to change just about anything, and pretty much everything is extremely well documented inside related files. You don't have to be a genius to figure these things out, it's not made overcomplicated, and with the documentation you can figure it out if you want. It also doesn't really include some exotic distro specific methods to get things done, rather generally sticks with the already established and distributed norms.

I had to rebuild ffmpeg and MPlayer yesterday, and instead of having to figure out everything from scratch, I could just study how BDFL had put together these packages, made a few (very few) adjustments and build the package like he did (but with my adjustments). It was rather easy to figure out too, as it was fully documented.

Furthermore, for the same reason you can do the above by default, Slackware is a devtool powerhouse, and if anyone ever asked me if I could recommend a distribution (or an OS) for programming, or learning programming, I'd only answer Slackware. Perhaps it's not the intended design, but if a school for example needs an OS where students can program and learn to program, Slackware would be a great choice,

So, it's not only a great choice to study the operating system itself, but also for the devtools it includes by default.

Good question that.

zeebra
Senior Member
Quote:
"Originally Posted by solarfields View Post
how does this correlate with the title?"
Good question that.

you knew that liblzma was a gegl dependency and that for several years the gnome project had been trying not to use a static library anymore.
I am not an alien look at the comments on Slackware we often find "I learned more in 5 years of Slackware than for 10 years on my previous distribution"

2 members found this post helpful.

I couldn't agree more, which is why I returned to using Slackware (my first distro was Slackware 20+ years ago). All these years of distrohopping, I still always had in the back of my head that Slackware is the superb distro for learning more.

2 members found this post helpful.

Like you, zeebra, I distro hop from time to time. I'm also back again with Slackware only. I'm currently dual booting Slackware64-current and OpenBSD 7.4 on this box. Early next year will mark 20 years with Slackware. Slackware is an exceptional distro, it has honed my problem solving skills. Slackware is first rate.

you are not the only one... me too and more others

It sure is, and the learning part was not the only reason I switched. Slackware 15 looked for the longest time to become a very shiny nice distro, and it is so. And well, let's not forget that I was sick and tired of the limitations of systemd also.

I'm extremely happy with the switch back, and I was previously using a very polished distro, one that even mostly followed classic GNU/Linux principles as well, plus gave alot of luxuries, like package manager and their own set of system management tools. To be frank, it's going to sound strange, but I was kind of sick and tired of package management too, just "too" convenient and offering no customization. I quite enjoy putting together my own packages in Slackware, that's a learning process too btw, and I will mostly just install what I need, not a bunch of crap I don't need (with a single click).

2 members found this post helpful.

Slackware: It doesn't suck. Disco sucks. Slackware doesn't.

Slackware: When you get serious. Serious about real functionality and ease of practical use. Serious about reliability and ability.

Slackware: for the SubGenius.