Mxit Attempt packaging

Mxit released their open platform a while ago as part of this platform they created an plug-in for libpurple the library that both Pidgin and Adium.

I am very pleased that the code is available as well as deb’s for my ubuntu machine. When running the deb it was presented with
MXit libPurple Plugin
MXit libPurple Plugin
(Converted from a rpm package by alien version 8.72.)

I was under the impression that debs were easier to create then rpm’s? Also why are they making rpm’s as their primary packaging and trying to convert to deb’s also I find it odd that they have had more downloads for the deb platform

  • MXit Pidgin Plugin v1.1.1 – Fedora 8/Red Hat (.rpm) (92.3 KiB, 364 hits)
  • MXit Pidgin Plugin v1.1.1 – Debian/Ubuntu (.deb) (91.1 KiB, 387 hits)
  • MXit libPurple Plugin v1.1.1 – Source Code (.tgz) (64.6 KiB, 446 hits)

Then again why are all those users downloading the source code? Is it because they don’t provide a 64bit arch package? Is it because they are removing the mxit promotional image at startup?

Who knows but I don’t really like to see my debs being created by Alien where there is a perfectly great Launchpad ppa’s Mxit.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Thursday, May 14th, 2009 Ubuntu

6 Comments to Mxit Attempt packaging

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

  2. Stefano Rivera on May 14th, 2009
  3. erk, I meant “for non-debian-developers”

  4. Stefano Rivera on May 14th, 2009
  5. 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….


  6. Pavlov on May 15th, 2009
  7. @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.

  8. drubin on May 16th, 2009
  9. Duh! Why so many source downloads? Because there are a lot of non-rpm && non-deb distros, that’s why!

  10. Alexandre Franke on May 18th, 2009
  11. 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

  12. Tyron Govender on May 23rd, 2009