Mike Hearn wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:53:48 +0200, Jakob Ilves wrote:
When I try to run inkscape I get the following message:

inkscape: error while loading shared libraries: libpangocairo-1.0.so.0:
cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

This has already been raised on the developer list (see the "Static RPM"
thread). It's a problem with the way the binaries were built. You cannot
separately install "libpangocairo" as it's a part of GTK+ 2.8, not a
standalone library. Inkscape does not need GTK+ 2.8, it's what's called a
"bogus dependency", ie the binary is requesting the library but never
actually uses it.
Ok... I'll dig into the archives and read the thread.

I understand that GTK+ 2.8 is a dependency (even if it's bogus) but if it is and I don't have that version (or a later) of GTK+ installed, shouldn't RPM refuse to install inkscape-0.42.2-1.rpm in the first place?
The autopackages do not have this problem as we use special tools that
automatically fix such things. They will probably work for you if the
static RPMs don't. 
I can give it a try and those autopackages will probably work for me... and for those the others I'm trying to recruit to the "Inkscape user community", the RPMs are moot anyway (almost all of them use Windows...).

In the long run it is very valuable to have a reliable RPM distribution, for many reasons.  One is that the rpm packaging technology, with warts and all, is well known to a large portion of the user community so if that distribution format is available and works, more users will be able to use the product.  I also assume that Inkscape eventually will be included in future distributions of Redhat, Fedora, Mandrake etc and both on their installation media as well as in their update services all software is made available as RPMs.  But at the time we have Inkscape 1.0 out, I assume that Redhat and co will ensure that RPMs are made available from them that work with their distributions.
The Inkscape project actually cares a *great* deal about installability,
far more than many open source projects do. Packages are tested before
release and new dependencies are carefully considered. Please do not blame
Inkscape for the fact that RPM is not a suitable technology for
multi-distribution installs.

Understood.  However, from my experiences trying to install the 0.42.2-1 RPM, it was not particularly obvious that it was RPM's unsuitability for multi-distribution installs that was the cause to the problem.  One reason for that is that for other open-source packages I've used, the precompiled RPMs have worked without any issues on my Linux laptop: either they accepted to install and then the product worked or they detected an unresolved dependency, reported that and aborted the install.  I never ran into a situation where the product RPM installed and then the product refused to run.
thanks -mike
My apologizes for sounding a bit cranky.  Keep up the good work!  I'll give the autopackages a try.

Best regards

This SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions,
and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl
Inkscape-user mailing list


Jakob Ilves, jakob.ilves@oracle.com
AIM ID: illviljans , Yahoo IM ID: illvilja