Motifd and Motif library dependencies
I upgraded from openSuSE 10.3 to openSuSE 11.2 a few days ago, and now I can no longer build motifd. For whatever reason, I now need to specify -ljpeg, -lpng, -lXmu, and -lXft to get these dependent libraries linked in. This wasn't required before for 10.3, but it is now. But from what I can tell, these dependencies were already in the 2010-01 binaries I built using openSuSE 10.3. Now I have to be explicit about this. For the maintainers of the various Linux distributions of cmucl, can I just add these libraries explicitly? Will that cause a problem? Ray
It just means you will need Open Motif installed. Most of the Linux distributions have these libraries available through apt, yum, or whatever. There is a FreeBSD port as well. This should just be noted in the install documentation for the convenience of new users. The practice of statically linking in a Motif library should have died with SunOS 4. On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond@gmail.com> wrote:
I upgraded from openSuSE 10.3 to openSuSE 11.2 a few days ago, and now I can no longer build motifd. For whatever reason, I now need to specify -ljpeg, -lpng, -lXmu, and -lXft to get these dependent libraries linked in. This wasn't required before for 10.3, but it is now. But from what I can tell, these dependencies were already in the 2010-01 binaries I built using openSuSE 10.3. Now I have to be explicit about this.
For the maintainers of the various Linux distributions of cmucl, can I just add these libraries explicitly? Will that cause a problem?
Ray
It just means you will need Open Motif installed. Most of the Linux distributions have these libraries available through apt, yum, or whatever. There is a FreeBSD port as well. This should just be noted in the install documentation for the convenience of new users. Ok. That seemed to work. I don't need to specify the extra libraries explicitly, but ldd shows that motifd now references jpeg, png, and Xft
Carl Shapiro wrote: libraries. This isn't true with the 2009-12 binaries that were built on some RH enterprise system. The new build also still links against libXm.so.4, but the 2009-12 link agains Xm.so.3.
The practice of statically linking in a Motif library should have died with SunOS 4.
What? We haven't done static linking of Motif for quite some time. Ray
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond@gmail.com> wrote:
What? We haven't done static linking of Motif for quite some time.
I had not realized that. It sounded like this was still the case because you had to fuss with the linker parameters. It does seem that Debian and Ubuntu do not have this version of Motif and there is no pre-compiled binary for these systems distributed by the maintainer. ftp://ftp.ics.com/openmotif/2.3/2.3.2/ It is not clear that this is a deal-breaker; the README file claims that 2.x releases are binary compatible and it is doubtful that anything in the motifd has changed that would break anything. A random user would be able to add a symlink on their system but package maintainers will have to relink or rebuild motifd on these systems.
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond@gmail.com <mailto:toy.raymond@gmail.com>> wrote:
What? We haven't done static linking of Motif for quite some time.
I had not realized that. It sounded like this was still the case because you had to fuss with the linker parameters. It does seem that Debian and Ubuntu do not have this version of Motif and there is no pre-compiled binary for these systems distributed by the maintainer. I think it has something to do with the list of dependencies. I can't check now since I installed openmotif over the top of whatever motif was
Carl Shapiro wrote: previously installed. But ldd shows that Xm.so.4 has many more dependencies than Xm.so.3. I vaguely remember there was some way to tell gcc/ld to link to specific version, but I can't remember. Maybe I'm wrong.
ftp://ftp.ics.com/openmotif/2.3/2.3.2/
It is not clear that this is a deal-breaker; the README file claims that 2.x releases are binary compatible and it is doubtful that anything in the motifd has changed that would break anything. A random user would be able to add a symlink on their system but package maintainers will have to relink or rebuild motifd on these systems.
Yes, 2.x releases should work just fine. I'm pretty sure nothing has changed in motifd from the time I used to build motifd with lesstif way back when. I think we'll have to let the package maintainers build and link the appropriate motif libraries. Ray
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 5:31 PM, Raymond Toy <toy.raymond@gmail.com <mailto:toy.raymond@gmail.com>> wrote:
What? We haven't done static linking of Motif for quite some time.
I had not realized that. It sounded like this was still the case because you had to fuss with the linker parameters. It does seem that Debian and Ubuntu do not have this version of Motif and there is no pre-compiled binary for these systems distributed by the maintainer. I think it has something to do with the list of dependencies. I can't check now since I installed openmotif over the top of whatever motif was
Carl Shapiro wrote: previously installed. But ldd shows that Xm.so.4 has many more dependencies than Xm.so.3. I vaguely remember there was some way to tell gcc/ld to link to specific version, but I can't remember. Maybe I'm wrong.
ftp://ftp.ics.com/openmotif/2.3/2.3.2/
It is not clear that this is a deal-breaker; the README file claims that 2.x releases are binary compatible and it is doubtful that anything in the motifd has changed that would break anything. A random user would be able to add a symlink on their system but package maintainers will have to relink or rebuild motifd on these systems.
Yes, 2.x releases should work just fine. I'm pretty sure nothing has changed in motifd from the time I used to build motifd with lesstif way back when. I think we'll have to let the package maintainers build and link the appropriate motif libraries. Ray
participants (2)
-
Carl Shapiro -
Raymond Toy