Welcome!
Important information
-- Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities
-- Change in MX sources

News
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- Mepis support still here

Current releases
-- MX-17.1 Final release info here
-- antiX-17 release info here

New users
-- Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
-- Here are the Forum Rules

Alternatives to Checkinstall

Message
Author
User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15966
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#11 Post by Stevo » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:18 pm


roadapathy
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:19 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#12 Post by roadapathy » Fri Jun 08, 2018 6:20 pm

Did you mean apt-build? I have never heard of apt-file.

If you meant apt-build, then I have used that in the past and you're right that it's all automatic BUT I don't think it's passing my compile tweaks to the compiler! When I watch it compiling, I never once see my -O3 or -march=native anywhere. Also, the repositories appear to be pretty far behind on many of the libraries that I'm trying to compile. :frown: That's fine if that means stability but there are a handful of sources that I'd like to compile when available. Chrome, is one example. Even in our test repository, the version of Chrome is pretty old.

roadapathy
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:19 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#13 Post by roadapathy » Sat Jun 09, 2018 2:53 pm

Stevo wrote:
Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:18 pm
Sorry, it was the apt-build tool: https://nigibox.wordpress.com/2009/10/0 ... ur-debian/
I do really like apt-build. The problems with this versus compiling from source and using checkinstall/make/cmake are:

1. It uses repositories and those could be pretty far behind the current stable version of the app one wants. MX Linux is more stable than Ubuntu, of course, but also has older releases.
2. I don't believe it's using the optimizations that I pass to it in apt-build.conf

It's a pretty awesome tool though. I still think MX Linux needs a mini Portage tool like Gentoo people have! ;-)

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15966
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#14 Post by Stevo » Sat Jun 09, 2018 3:14 pm

If you mean Chromium instead of Chrome, I tried the current release the other day, and it failed with a compiler error about halfway through that I don't know how to fix. Maybe a C++ maven could patch it, but I'm not one.

We currently don't have any versions in our test repo, so I'm assuming you're talking about the Debian Chromium, where the updates have indeed seemed to stop. Perhaps they are hitting the compiler error, too.

Usually you can pass compiler flags in the debian/rules file by adding a line like

Code: Select all

CPPFLAGS=flags
See here for some hints: https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening

roadapathy
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:19 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#15 Post by roadapathy » Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:20 pm

Shoot. Well, that is unfortunately about Chromium browser but I can live with that but when I did use apt-build on the stable Chromium browser, it was actually older than the binary.

I'm fine with compiling a lot of things from source but I'm getting a lot of failures on MX Linux and I haven't yet figured out why. I'm currently trying to compile and install a newer version of Cmake but even that fails.

User avatar
rich
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 296
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:39 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#16 Post by rich » Sun Jun 10, 2018 12:04 am

What system do you normally use (as opposed to MX)
MX 17.1 Dell Inspiron N5110

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15966
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#17 Post by Stevo » Sun Jun 10, 2018 4:19 pm

Basically, our packaging team will update cmake in the test repo when we run into some program that requires a newer version to build. So far, the 3.9 Stretch version has been able to handle all backports so far.

We find it much easier and less hassle overall to properly backport from the upstream Debian sources. There's a guide that explains why, though aging, the reasons still hold true. http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=228570

The current release of cmake is 3.11.3, and upstream Debian has 3.11.2. Let me see if that's any trouble to properly backport.

roadapathy
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:19 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#18 Post by roadapathy » Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:04 pm

Well, I believe it must be for the best because MX Linux seems to be the most stable and most compatible of everything I had tried before. Ubuntu had some cutting edge updates but I swear to you that few things worked on it. Certainly NOT Compiz compositor. Works perfectly on MX Linux.

Should I report my issues somewhere? I can't promise that Cmake and Make are the issues but I could at least let somebody know.

roadapathy
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:19 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#19 Post by roadapathy » Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:05 pm

rich wrote:
Sun Jun 10, 2018 12:04 am
What system do you normally use (as opposed to MX)
I used Xubuntu before but a lot of things did not work on there. Sure, they had bleeding-edge files but the system wasn't well integrated or something since so many things didn't work. Often, they would produce a new version and things like Wine would completely stop working. It had a lot of quarts.

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15966
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Alternatives to Checkinstall

#20 Post by Stevo » Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:13 pm

Debian often applies patches to the vanilla source to fix build issues like you describe. and following the packaging recipe automatically gets and installs all the build-depends.

FWIW, I was able to build proper deb packages of the current cmake-3.11.3 by using the upstream 3.11.2 debian folder as a template. It required an update of libuv1-dev first, which is available already in stretch-backports.

Post Reply

Return to “Software / Configuration”