From: Theodore K. <ki...@ba...> - 2009-12-22 18:28:08
|
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, Rogier Wolff wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 10:15:50AM -0600, Theodore Kilgore wrote: >> >> OK, now we get somewhere. Or, at least it appears so. >> >> It is possible to remove a package without removing all the things which >> depend on it. > >> Clearly, the next question is whether or not it is possible to put >> the old package back, with no visible ill effects having occurred in >> the meantime. For, one should never do anything from which there is >> no easy way to back out. > > The "way to go" is to first do a pracitse run on compiling the version > in your distro. > > On debian-based systems: > > mkdir test > cd test > apt-get source libgphoto2-2 > sudo apt-get build-dep libgphoto2-2 > cd libgphoto2-2.4.2/ > dpkg-buildpackage > > Next, if you want to hack the source yourself, I just delve in, modify > things and type "make // sudo make install". it's all configured and > in a working configuration for my system, so that should work. I take it that you mean, do the mods to the distro package above? Something like > cd libgphoto2-2.4.2/ (do some modifications) make make install ? > > The better thing to do is to build a new package. But this package > will get the same version number as the distro package, and somehow > apt-get will prefer the distro version, so it will continue suggesting > upgrades to the version in the repository. > > One trick is to bump the version number. I did that once, but I don't > remember how I did that. I will figure it out when I need it again. > > Another option is to "lock" the package. I did that once, but I don't > remember how I did that. I will figure it out when I need it again. > > > If you just do the "make install" thingy, you will overwrite the > distro version that is still installed. So no need to > uninstall/override the warnings from the package manager. OK. > > If you bump the version number, and install the dpkg-buildpackage > results, your package manger will prefer your > newer-than-everybody-else's version, and properly upgrade from the > distro version to your version without any further trouble. > > > > If you need to go to a totally different version, after building (but > most likely not installing) the distro-version, you can try to > configure/build the newer tree. You can try to insert the new tree in > the place where the distro-one lives, and get the build to simply use > the newer version. I haven't done this. > > You can also just type "./configure ; make ; make install" in the new > tree. This usually leads me to find out that libgphoto2 by default > lives in /usr/local, and that I have to start over: > "./configure prefix=/usr; make; sudo make install". Yes. It is an old problem. All distros want to put everything in /usr (with varying degrees of enforcement of that, which can even go to the extreme of disabling /usr/local), and all development work seems to take place in /usr/local. > > Actually I remember going through these steps less than two weeks > ago... :-) > > Roger. Well, thanks. Now I have two suggestions that I can send along. Theodore Kilgore |