[vox-tech] Compile Question

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Bob Scofield (scofield at omsoft.com):

> Okay, I didn't have the KDE development packages.  I discovered this the 
> cheesy way.  I went to Debian, found the packages, and then used apt-get to 
> get them.  Since they installed, I knew I hadn't had them.  (It's cheesy 
> because you don't have to look around your system for them.)
> 
> These packages eliminated the prefix problem.  But I ran into another error 
> telling me I didn't have libkipi.  So I downloaded libkipi and compiled it.  
> That was the first thing I've compiled in my life, believe it or not. 

This will be a little redundant to Henry House's excellent explanation,
but:  I checked the packages.debian.org engine for "libkipi-dev", and
immediately found:

http://packages.debian.org/testing/virtual/libkipi-dev

   Virtual Package: libkipi-dev

   This is a virtual package. See the Debian policy for a definition of
   virtual packages.  Packages providing libkipi-dev:

   libkipi0-dev
       library for apps that want to use kipi-plugins (development version) 

So, very likely, installing the latter-named package Debian-style would
have saved you a lot of grief.

>  With libkipi, I was finally able to compile the kipi-plugins with one 
> exception.  There was one I couldn't compile because, according to the error 
> message, I didn't have lighoto2. 

I assume you meant to type "libghoto2".

The runtime libs for that _might_ be in package gphoto2, and the
development libs in gphoto2-dev -- but honestly I haven't a clue what
libghoto2 is and how it relates to gphoto2, so I may well be talking out
of my hat.  (Obviously, all this is related to Digikam.)

> The compiling took a long time.  The program comes already compiled on SuSE.  
> Debian seems to be a distro for people with time on their hands. 

There definitely _is_ stuff that's not compiled for Debian at all -- at
least not _official_ .debs from the Debian Project mirrors -- and that
can pose dilemmas as to how best proceed.  In those cases, there are
third-party .deb repositories, which we-all would be glad to tell you
about, if you're interested.

I notice that Digikam itself is not officiallly offered in Debian's
_stable_ branch (currently Debian 3.0/woody), but is offered in the
testing & unstable branches:

http://packages.debian.org/testing/graphics/digikam

   Package: digikam (0.7-3)
   digital photo management application for KDE

   Digikam is an easy to use and powerful digital photo management
   application, which makes importing, organizing and manipulating
   digital photos a "snap". An easy to use interface is provided to
   connect to your digital camera, preview the images and download
   and/or delete them.

   Digikams buildin image editor makes the common photo correction a
   simple task. The image editor is extensible via plugins. The
   digikamimageplugins package contains many useful image editor plugins.

   Digikam can also make use of the KIPI image handling plugins to
   extend it's capabilities even further for photo manipulations, im-
   and export, etc. The kipi-plugins package contains many very useful
   extentions. 

Note the reference to the "digikamimageplugins package".  Maybe you 
didn't need to compile kipi-plugins at all?  (Further disclaimer:  I'm
equally clueless about what kipi-plugins refers to, or I'd be able to 
give more-specific advice.  Maybe "digikamimageplugins" encompasses the 
"kipi-plugins", but maybe not.)

In part, I was trying (in the above) to illustrate my general point that
Debian newcomers often resort to source tarballs a bit too hastily.
A reconnoiter of available alternatives is often prudent, before doing
so.

I hope this helps.

-- 
Cheers,                 There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those who 
Rick Moen               know ternary, those who don't, and those who are now 
rick at linuxmafia.com     looking for their dictionaries.  -- Ron Fabre