On Thursday 17 February 2005 22:44, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 04:26:12PM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > On Thursday 17 February 2005 21:32, Michael Koch wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 03:09:41PM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 17 February 2005 13:18, Bartosz Fenski aka fEnIo wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2005 at 06:19:59AM +0200, Marcus Sundman wrote:
> > > > > > I do the following (irrelevant output omitted):
> > > > > > ----8<--------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > /usr/src/tmp$ apt-src install foo
> > > > > > /usr/src/tmp$ cd foo-version
> > > > > > /usr/src/tmp/foo-version$ apt-src build foo
> > > > > > E: Not installed
> > > > > > /usr/src/tmp/foo-version$
> > > > > > ---->8--------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any idea what might be wrong?
> > > > >
> > > > > You don't have to enter to foo-version directory.
> > > > > Anyway it should work even with that... both ways works for me.
> > > >
> > > > I tried that, too, but it still just says "E: Not installed".
> > > >
> > > > What's "E" and what's not installed? (This must be one of the least
> > > > helpful error messages I've ever seen.)
> > >
> > > E means "error".
> >
> > Ah, ok.. (If the author tried to be confusing he could have made it say
> > "Blue: No roof" or something. Although on a second thought that
> > probably would have been too obvious and made ppl check out the source,
> > and this way he got it actually more confusing by being less confusing.
> > Clever.)
>
> The addition of one compound-word ("Build-dependencies") would have
> solved all of your ills.Really? Where do you feel this compound-word should be added? The man page of apt-src already talks about build-dependencies, and says that "apt-src install" "will make sure that the build-dependencies [...] are satisfied". Since I just ran "apt-src install" I would assume that the build-dependencies are satisfied. The man page doesn't say that these dependencies would have to be fixed manually or even how one would go about doing that if ever there was a need for it. (Mentioning "apt-get build-dep" on that man page would have been nice.) The man page of apt-src also says that "it can be run as a normal user, or as root". Good, I thought, then I'll run it as root as little as possible. So I ran "apt-src install foo" (which installed a gazillion packages that apparently can't even be marked as "auto" in aptitude (argh!)) as root and then "apt-src build foo" as a normal user. -> "E: Not installed" WTF? > The BTS is ---> over there. Huh? What is over where? > > (It would be nice if the man page of apt-src would state that "build" > > requires doing an "apt-get build-dep".) > > Again, BTS ---> over there, and besides, it's not required to do an > apt-get build-dep if you've already got all of the relevant packages > installed. Before I ran "apt-get build-dep" "apt-src build" didn't work, running "apt-get build-dep" did _not_ install anything but after running it "apt-src build" did work. I have no idea what kind of magic happened there, but it worked so I'm thankful that Michael Koch suggested that I try that. Happy, happy, joy, joy. - Marcus Sundman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
