Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4446 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] Compiling a metalink client - aria2 - impossible [Solved]
  • From: "Carlos E. R." <robin.listas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 00:07:31 +0100 (CET)
  • Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612070154340.20164@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hash: SHA1

The Wednesday 2006-12-06 at 23:27 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:

> Carlos E. R. wrote:
> > The Wednesday 2006-12-06 at 16:10 -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> ...
> >>>>> c-ares containes libcares and is available in the same
> >>>>> location.
> >>>> And how on earth was I to know that is included in c-ares?
> That's basically what repositories are made for.
> What are you expecting ? Black magic ?
> Just because c-ares does not ship with SUSE, I shouldn't have built
> c-ares async DNS support in my aria2 RPMs ?

I'm not saying that. What I say is that using the command line "rpm -i ..."
there is no way I can know what package contains that library.

And I insist that I don't want to add a new repository to Yast, because
that operation takes over an hour, and then YOU takes even longer to
start. I understand that repositories solve it another way - I didn't know
that previously - but that makes things more difficult for installing a
single lone rpm.

Now I also know that looking inside the filelists.xml.gz file of the
repository and searching for the file in question, I can learn the name of
the missing rpm.

> There's a lot of packages you wouldn't get anywhere for SUSE Linux then.
> >>> 'smart' told me
> ...
> > The command "rpm -test -i aria2.rpm" should have told me that: there is a
> > "requires" token in the spec file precissely for that purpose, to list the
> > required rpms, no need to go searching.
> No it is not.
> Using Requires: with explicit package names is considered bad practice.
> Again, as you didn't care to answer that in my previous mail: all of the
> RPMs build by the SUSE packagers and all the RPMs that are on the Build
> Service are done exactly the same way: *without* explicit Requires.
> That's what AutoReqProv is for, and package managers can resolve those
> automatic dependencies back to packages.

What is it I did not answer? :-?

And now that you explain it that way it is understandable why you make it
that way. You probably know better than me, but I prefer explicit

> Don't tell me I suck at building RPMs.

Hey! You are way too touchy. I never said that, and even less referring to
_you_. I didn't know it was you. And that's true even if you don't believe

> ...
> > It did. I got "wxDownload Fast" compiled, instead, and I will try that
> > one. The aria2 goes out of the window.
> aria2 works really well though, very lightweight (uses even less RAM
> than rtorrent).

That's understandable, and that's why I wanted to try that one first.

> And it's not even that hard to compile:
> autoreconf -fiv
> export CXXFLAGS="-I/usr/include/libxml2"
> ./configure --prefix=/usr/local \
> --enable-gnutls \
> --enable-bittorrent \
> --enable-metalink
> make
> make install
> The only trick is
> export CXXFLAGS="-I/usr/include/libxml2"

That's similar to the method I have used, except the autoreconf part
(which bombs out in my system, anyway).

But the CXXFLAGS trick doesn't work; observe what I get:

checking for libxml - version >= 2.6.24...
*** An old version of libxml (2.6.23) was found.
*** You need a version of libxml newer than 2.6.24. The latest version of
*** libxml is always available from

It still wants a newer version of the libxml, and without it, metalink
support is disabled.

> You could have looked at the .spec file in my aria2.src.rpm as I pointed
> you to the directory where it is available from:

Because 1) I haven't had time yet, I was answering email and attending my
real life; and 2) because when I was trying to compile it I didn't know of
that site and the relation to the one I was told about.

Why isn't it there at
""? That's where I
would expect source rpms to be.


I got it compiled with a hack: editing the configure script thus:

# min_xml_version=2.6.24

With that single change, the configure and make works fine (no parameters
needed), and the programs seems to run fine, too - so does your version,
of course, which I have also installed and used, but I prefer my own if I
can get it ;-)

And this solves my original question :-)

- --
Carlos E. R.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76


To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups