Re: BitPim rpms > 0.7.16 don't work on SuSE Linux

>  > I need (among other things) "APSW", but there only seems to be a version
>  > of that for MS-ware. 
>  
>  No, there is only a binary version for Windows.  There is a source version
>  for all other platforms and build instructions in the APSW source and
>  web site.

The download page at http://www.rogerbinns.com/apsw.html#Download points
right back at the bitpim page, where the latest version shown has only:

    Release Notes apsw-3.2.2-r1 [show only this release]  2005-07-08 00:59
  Download apsw-3.2.2-r1.win32-py2.3.exe
  290393   51  i386  .exe (32-bit Windows)
  Download apsw-3.2.2-r1.win32-py2.4.exe
  294508   78  i386  .exe (32-bit Windows)
  Download apsw-3.2.2-r1.zip

i.e. MS-Windows executables and an MS-Windows "zip" file.  Nothing that
says anything about source and nothing in a non-proprietary format.
 
>  > It also says to get the source via CVS, but the
>  > sourceforge CVS Backend is not responding.
>  
>  First update on 
>  
>   http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?group_id=1&docid=2352

( 2005-07-22 07:11:18 - Project CVS Service )   As of 2005-07-27 anonymous 
access to CVS for projects starting with l, s, f, b, r, k is currently offline. 

bitpim starts with...
  
>  > The semi-hidden "daily"
>  > CVS tarball (dated July 6) could be downloaded, but there"s no README,
>  > no makefile, no configure script...
>  
>  That is because the instructions are on the developer page, there is 
>  no makefile (this is python code), there is nothing to configure
>  (err, this is python code).

The particular problem traces to /usr/lib/bitpim-0.7.33/libwx_gtk2ud-2.6.so.0
which surely isn't python code.  Nor is it built as part of the standard
wx-python installation , and...  Moreover, there evidently needs to be some
sort of configuration for where things get installed; "/usr/lib/bitpim-0.7.33"
isn't a standard directory.  Frankly, the lack of sufficiently detailed
instructions is probably why your frequent exhortations to "send in your
code" are met with silence.
   
>  >>   - Wait until they fix this backwards incompatibility (this
>  >>     looks unlikely)
>  > 
>  > Xinerama is an XFree86 thing as far as I know, and a number of 
> distributions
>  > have dropped Xfree86 for Xorg due to a GPL brouhaha.
>  
>  There is perfect backwards compatibility going to Xorg from XFree 
>  except Xorg chose to remove this one symbol.
>  
>  >>   - I have to build BitPim on yet another version of Linux
>  > 
>  > I"m surprised if Head Rat hasn"t also switched from Xfree86 in their
>  > current distributions.
>  
>  No doubt they have, but what does that solve.  I am only prepared to
>  build on one version of Linux since I have better things to do with 
>  my time.
[...]
>  Redhat 9 currently provides the most binary compatibility with all the 
>  versions of Linux out there

Evidently not, and switching to a current (Xorg-based) distribution would
likely solve the problem.  At the moment, the bitpim page says "The Linux
distribution is an RPM file built on Redhat 9 and can be used as is on
RPM based distributions" which isn't true; SuSE (and others with Xorg-based
X implementations) is an RPM-based distribution, and the rpms certainly
can't "be used as is".


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click
_______________________________________________
BitPim-user mailing list BitPim-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe or change options at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitpim-user

There are several hundred people on this list.  Please be
courteous, on topic and follow the instructions before posting
http://bitpim.sf.net/testhelp/support.htm