Comments on: Mxit Attempt packaging

By: Tyron Govender

Tyron Govender — Sat, 23 May 2009 15:03:59 +0000

I downloaded the source, because they don’t provide a 64 bit .deb package. I still havent been able to make it (still a Linux noob)

This is the error I have, when using make on Ubuntu 9.04 64 bit:

/usr/bin/ld: actions.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against `a local symbol’ can not be used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC
actions.o: could not read symbols: Bad value
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [compile] Error 1

By: Alexandre Franke

Alexandre Franke — Mon, 18 May 2009 20:50:51 +0000

Duh! Why so many source downloads? Because there are a lot of non-rpm && non-deb distros, that’s why!

By: drubin

drubin — Sat, 16 May 2009 09:46:18 +0000

@Pavlov: I suppose that makes sense then

Still would like to see the debs being packaged with out alien and on multiple platforms ie 64bit.

By: Pavlov

Pavlov — Fri, 15 May 2009 21:33:31 +0000

The primary development platform for the MXit developers involved with the Pidgin plugin is Fedora, so RPM was the obvious first choice. RPM’s are also used for internal software deployments, so the RPM generation tool/scripts already existed.

You ask why the source code downloads are so high? Not really sure. It’s possibly related to the PC Client competition running at the moment. Or Linux, FreeBSD, Mac users want to compile their own version. Or maybe people are just curious about how it all works….

cheers

By: Stefano Rivera

Stefano Rivera — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:09:27 +0000

erk, I meant “for non-debian-developers”

By: Stefano Rivera

Stefano Rivera — Thu, 14 May 2009 10:09:05 +0000

No, I think rpms are easier to non-developers. But debs work better