I don't use a tarball. I follow the link in the message where you inform about the fix and I done the next.
git clone git://anongit.kde.org/nepomuk-core cd nepomuk-core mkdir build cd build cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=`kde4-config --prefix` .. make stop nepomuk sudo make install start nepomuk I not sure if I done the things well. On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Sebastian Trüg <tr...@kde.org> wrote: > what did you compile? git branch KDE/4.7? or some release tarball? > > On 10/04/2011 07:42 PM, Ignacio Serantes wrote: > > I tried the patch and seems that is working. I'm not totally sure > > because one Nepomuk's service is crashing and nepomukserver don't stop > > without killing it :). > > > > I'm totally new to this so I don't know if I done something wrong or if > > the next information is useful. I will try to improve my C++ skills. > > ------------------- > > > > Application: Nepomuk Service Stub (nepomukservicestub), signal: > > Segmentation fault > > > > [KCrash Handler] > > > > #6 0x00007faec8f3df4f in Nepomuk::Repository::close (this=0x7e6ac0) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/repository.cpp:86 > > > > #7 0x00007faec8f3e07d in Nepomuk::Repository::~Repository > > (this=0x7e6ac0, __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/repository.cpp:75 > > > > #8 0x00007faec8f3e159 in Nepomuk::Repository::~Repository > > (this=0x7e6ac0, __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/repository.cpp:76 > > > > #9 0x00007faec8d01d5f in Soprano::Server::ServerCore::~ServerCore() () > > from /usr/lib64/libsopranoserver.so.1 > > > > #10 0x00007faec8f3ce45 in Nepomuk::Core::~Core (this=0x74b150, > > __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/nepomukcore.cpp:45 > > > > #11 0x00007faec8f3cec9 in Nepomuk::Core::~Core (this=0x74b150, > > __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/nepomukcore.cpp:48 > > > > #12 0x00007faed74fb084 in QObjectPrivate::deleteChildren() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 > > > > #13 0x00007faed74ffd32 in QObject::~QObject() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 > > > > #14 0x00007faec8f3c0b3 in ~Storage (this=<value optimized out>, > > __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/storage.cpp:54 > > > > #15 Nepomuk::Storage::~Storage (this=<value optimized out>, > > __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/services/storage/storage.cpp:56 > > > > #16 0x00007faed74fb084 in QObjectPrivate::deleteChildren() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 > > > > #17 0x00007faed74ffd32 in QObject::~QObject() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 > > > > #18 0x0000000000404d59 in Nepomuk::ServiceControl::~ServiceControl > > (this=0x74a2f0, __in_chrg=<value optimized out>) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/servicestub/servicecontrol.cpp:41 > > > > #19 0x00007faed74fb084 in QObjectPrivate::deleteChildren() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 > > > > #20 0x00007faed74ffd32 in QObject::~QObject() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 > > > > #21 0x00007faed52b5e22 in QApplication::~QApplication() () from > > /usr/lib64/libQtGui.so.4 > > > > #22 0x00000000004044fc in main (argc=36, argv=0x7fff2e34bd78) at > > /home/ignacio/devel/nepomuk-core/servicestub/main.cpp:105 > > > > -------------------- > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Ignacio Serantes <k...@aynoa.net > > <mailto:k...@aynoa.net>> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Sebastian Trüg <tr...@kde.org > > <mailto:tr...@kde.org>> wrote: > > > > On 10/04/2011 01:24 PM, Ignacio Serantes wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Sebastian Trüg <tr...@kde.org > > <mailto:tr...@kde.org> > > > <mailto:tr...@kde.org <mailto:tr...@kde.org>>> wrote: > > > > > > Ok, the bug is fixed now. :) > > > > > > > > > I will try to find time to compile Nepomuk sources and update > > my system > > > to test the patch. This will be my first time doing something > > like this > > > so I'm starting to pray... > > > > > > On the other side, what about the configuration issue? > > > > What is the problem? IMHO the configuration is easy: index > external > > > > media or not index them. Manually added information is completely > > unrelated to this and cannot be influenced by any configuration. > > > > > > The problem is last night I changed from "Index filex on all > > removable devices" to "Ignore all removable media" and all my > > resources was deleted again. I do the test with one HD connected and > > the other disconnected and resources of both HDs was deleted. By the > > way I don't know if you consider Bangarand metadata manual or not :). > > > > I will try to reproduce the problem. > > > > -- > > Best wishes, > > Ignacio > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best wishes, > > Ignacio > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Nepomuk mailing list > > Nepomuk@kde.org > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk > _______________________________________________ > Nepomuk mailing list > Nepomuk@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk > -- Best wishes, Ignacio
_______________________________________________ Nepomuk mailing list Nepomuk@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/nepomuk
