Arch Linux

mbostwick

Member

Registered: 2011-03-27

Posts: 25

A Sym Link For A Libraries Header (liblas laszip and ossim) [Solved]

I'm working on a PKGBUILD for liblas because I would like to be able to build ossim. Once of liblas dependencies is laszip . I was able to create a PKGBUILD for laszip. The issue I am having however, is that liblas needs a sym link ("ln -s /usr/include/ laszip") in order to build properly. At first, I looked at patching the cmake build of liblas to not need the /usr/include/laszip path, however, it appears that the code references the folder with its includes.

My question then is, should I put the sym link inside the laszip (and if so at what stage?)
or
Should I work on a patch to completely, remove the invalid includes ?
or
is there a better way ?

UPDATE:
There was a better way! I just needed to add --includedir with the package location!.

Last edited by mbostwick (2015-09-06 10:04:36)

severach

Member

Registered: 2015-05-23

Posts: 192

Re: A Sym Link For A Libraries Header (liblas laszip and ossim) [Solved]

liblas and laszip have long been done your new versions are quite different. Update yours from the old versions and you might find that things start working without resorting to hackery.

Alternate locations on Github:
liblas
laszip

Last edited by severach (2015-09-06 06:58:42)

mbostwick

Member

Registered: 2011-03-27

Posts: 25

Re: A Sym Link For A Libraries Header (liblas laszip and ossim) [Solved]

severach, if you check the websites(you listed) compared to what I put into aur4(https://aur4.archlinux.org/), you can clearly see they are the latest released versions. The issue here has to do with arch's moving of lib64, https://www.archlinux.org/news/update-f … -together/. If you read the liblas, you can see its dev work has slowed, as well(which explains why they may be targeting the old lib64 path..)  . As such, I'm open to advise to fixing the build, for the short term, I just added the sym link under the laszip package in aur.. However, these are the latest released versions. It also happens, that I just did a fresh install of arch linux, so I am also using the latest of just about everything.

Just to add a little bit more here:
https://github.com/libLAS/libLAS/blob/7 … on.cpp#L55

You can see the include location, here is the issue..

Last edited by mbostwick (2015-09-06 07:28:58)

Raynman

Member

Registered: 2011-10-22

Posts: 1,539

Re: A Sym Link For A Libraries Header (liblas laszip and ossim) [Solved]

severach, if you check the websites(you listed) compared to what I put into aur4(https://aur4.archlinux.org/), you can clearly see they are the latest released versions.

What are you talking about? Your PKGBUILD builds/installs laszip differently than the PKGBUILD from the old AUR that severach linked and that is clearly related to this /usr/include/laszip directory.

The issue here has to do with arch's moving of lib64, https://www.archlinux.org/news/update-f … -together/.

I don't see the relation to this particular issue that you're trying to work around with a symlink.

As such, I'm open to advise to fixing the build

And you got it: update your own PKGBUILD to do things the same way or simply use the existing PKGBUILDs. You said in your other thread you like not having to make PKGBUILDs, so why not use what is already out there? Maybe it doesn't solve everything, but you don't even try.

mbostwick

Member

Registered: 2011-03-27

Posts: 25

Re: A Sym Link For A Libraries Header (liblas laszip and ossim) [Solved]

so I think the solution here is to add the include --includedir="/usr/include/${pkgname}. However, I'm unclear, of when to use the includedir vs when the default will work(as clearly, some packages don't use the package names in there include..).  I will agree I did get side tracked by severach statement about the old version theory.

As far as finding other pkgbuild, I did try searching, but knowing when to use what flags is highly specific. I did check for the correct flags to use, but I read includedir as the place to look for packages, not install them, which I should be more careful in reading..

Raynman please see the forum etiquette. 
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fo … ther_users

As to me not trying, I could have simply left the sym link, but I understand that was a quick and dirty approach. I had the freedom to not share the package as well. Its nice to get back involved with arch, please don't make me regret that decision. Life's too short..

Last edited by mbostwick (2015-09-06 10:09:10)

Raynman

Member

Registered: 2011-10-22

Posts: 1,539

Re: A Sym Link For A Libraries Header (liblas laszip and ossim) [Solved]

Raynman please see the forum etiquette. 
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fo … ther_users

As it says there, that works both ways. My tone is also influenced (perhaps too much in this case) by the way you ask for help and respond to the help you are given. You offhandedly dismissing helpful replies from people like severach as if they failed to understand your problem could just as well be described as rude. That's also where the "not trying" was directed at: not trying to really read/process comments or links provided in comments. I may have perceived you as more lazy/less forthcoming/unresponsive to replies than you actually were or intended to be and you may have seen some replies (not just mine) as less helpful/more rude than they were intended. Sometimes replies are also just a bit abrupt because, as you say, life is short and a brief nudge may be enough for some people and others can always ask for more info (without being offended, preferably ).

And with the way you post it would actually not be so strange if somebody misunderstands. That's what I was trying to say in the other thread in the post concluding with the rhetorical question "why didn't you say so?". That thread started with little more than one sentence. You blamed the wiki, but it turned out you actually had an error about permissions/ssh keys. In this thread it starts all about a symlink, but that symlink is just a workaround you came up with to deal with the actual error. Here you did give a bit more information in the first post, but in both cases you didn't include the actual error. That's a so-called XY-problem and that is frustrating. Mention the symlink, but take care to describe the real problem first.

So I guess we can both try to do better in the future and not waste more time on this.

Last edited by Raynman (2015-09-06 12:14:30)