[Bug 40017] New: Configure cannot locate some installed packages for 32 bit dependencies
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 Bug ID: 40017 Summary: Configure cannot locate some installed packages for 32 bit dependencies Product: Wine Version: unspecified Hardware: x86-64 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: minor Priority: P2 Component: -unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: goochmi(a)gmail.com Distribution: --- I am on fedora 23 (64 bit release only afaik) configure: libgphoto2 32-bit development files not found, digital cameras won't be supported. configure: gstreamer-1.0 base plugins 32-bit development files not found, gstreamer support disabled I have gone through attempting to install both the 32 bit and 64 bit packages for these. The 64 bit compile mode finds them, but the 32 bit one does not. I installed the same package for both using dnf, so unless the version is TOO new or something is misnamed and the one wine wants is actually not available, i'm not sure what to do about it. Not that I necessarily need these features, but I am trying to figure out why it cannot find them. ---This package cannot be seen by either 32 bit mode or 64 bit mode--- configure: OpenCL 32-bit development files not found, OpenCL won't be supported. I have installed several opencl related development packages that I found using dnf search, but I can't seem to find one that satisfies this for either 32 or 64 bit builds. --- the following are probably not bugs, but I could not test their detection--- configure: OSS sound system found but too old (OSSv4 needed), OSS won't be supported. I'm not sure which package, if any, provides this functionality on fedora23. I've been attempting to locate such, but as of yet haven't found it. configure: libhal development files not found, no legacy dynamic device support. ^ I don't think fedora even HAS libhal packages anymore, so I can't really test this one. If i'm wrong feel free to correct me on that. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #1 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- $ sudo dnf search libgphoto2 Last metadata expiration check performed 1:08:14 ago on Thu Jan 21 12:44:05 2016. ======================================================================= N/S Matched: libgphoto2 ======================================================================== libgphoto2.x86_64 : Library for accessing digital cameras libgphoto2.i686 : Library for accessing digital cameras libgphoto2-devel.i686 : Headers and links to compile against the libgphoto2 library libgphoto2-devel.x86_64 : Headers and links to compile against the libgphoto2 library [mgooch(a)gooch-fedora20 wine64]$ sudo dnf search gstreamer1 | grep devel gstreamer1-vaapi-devel.x86_64 : Development files for gstreamer1-vaapi gstreamer1-vaapi-devel.i686 : Development files for gstreamer1-vaapi gstreamer1-rtsp-server-devel.x86_64 : Development files for gstreamer1-rtsp-server-devel.i686 : Development files for gstreamer1-rtsp-server gstreamer1-devel.x86_64 : Libraries/include files for GStreamer streaming media gstreamer1-devel.i686 : Libraries/include files for GStreamer streaming media gstreamer1-devel-docs.noarch : Developer documentation for GStreamer streaming gstreamer1-libav-devel-docs.noarch : Development documentation for the libav gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel.x86_64 : GStreamer Base Plugins Development files gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel.i686 : GStreamer Base Plugins Development files gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-devel.x86_64 : Development files for the GStreamer gstreamer1-rtsp-server-devel-docs.noarch : Developer documentation for gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free-devel.i686 : Development files for the GStreamer gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel-docs.noarch : Developer documentation for gstreamer1-plugins-ugly-devel-docs.noarch : Development documentation for the $ sudo dnf install -y libgphoto2-devel.i686 libgphoto2-devel.x86_64 libgphoto2.x86_64 libgphoto2.i686 gstreamer1-devel.x86_64 gstreamer1-devel.i686 gstreamer1-devel-docs.noarch gstreamer1-libav-devel-docs.noarch gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel.x86_64 gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel.i686 gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel-docs.noarch Last metadata expiration check performed 1:11:30 ago on Thu Jan 21 12:44:05 2016. Package libgphoto2-devel-2.5.8-1.fc23.i686 is already installed, skipping. Package libgphoto2-devel-2.5.8-1.fc23.x86_64 is already installed, skipping. Package libgphoto2-2.5.8-1.fc23.x86_64 is already installed, skipping. Package libgphoto2-2.5.8-1.fc23.i686 is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-devel-1.6.2-1.fc23.x86_64 is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-devel-1.6.2-1.fc23.i686 is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-devel-docs-1.6.2-1.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-libav-devel-docs-1.6.2-1.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel-1.6.2-1.fc23.x86_64 is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel-1.6.2-1.fc23.i686 is already installed, skipping. Package gstreamer1-plugins-base-devel-docs-1.6.2-1.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #2 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- Unless i'm missing something, the correct libraries appear to be installed. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #3 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- investigating the config.log a bit more turns up the following for the gstreamer checks: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/313402/ it LOOKS like it might be using the 64 bit headers.... but i'm not entirely sure. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #4 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- Relevant bits of config.log for gphoto2: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/313405/ -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #5 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- linker flag for -lexif seems to be the the failure point. possibly a missing dependency check? installing libexif-devel seems to get past that configure check. error message did not indicate that libexif was the missing library, had to check the config.log file to discover that, which may not be obvious to all users. The configure script seems to assume it will be there. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #6 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- I'm seeing some odd stuff in the gstreamer portion of the logs. these flags: -I/usr/include/gstreamer-1.0 -I/usr/lib64/gstreamer-1.0/include -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib64/glib-2.0/include Indicate the test compile is using a mixture of the headers from /usr/lib64/ and /usr/include. Is it supposed to do that? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #7 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- as far as opencl, i'm not even sure where to begin figuring out whether I have the correct packages I did find: [mgooch(a)gooch-fedora20 ~]$ locate OpenCL.so /usr/lib/libOpenCL.so.1 /usr/lib/libOpenCL.so.1.0.0 /usr/lib64/libOpenCL.so.1 /usr/lib64/libOpenCL.so.1.0.0 /usr/local/cuda-6.5/targets/x86_64-linux/lib/libOpenCL.so but configure:10785: checking for clGetPlatformInfo in -lOpenCL configure:10810: gcc -m32 -o conftest -g -O2 conftest.c -lOpenCL >&5 /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lOpenCL collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status configure:10810: $? = 1 configure: failed program was: ---- redacted this for length, you probably know your own test code ---- configure:10819: result: no -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #8 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- Had a hunch, so I added softlinks for the *.so files ls libOpenCL.so* -alh in each the /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 directories, and this seemed to rectify the issue for the configure script. I'm not sure why the packages didn't do this by default, they may have a good reason for all I know. Just providing the feedback so you are aware. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #9 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- sorry forgot to specify, softlinks that just ended in .so, as opposed to .so.1, etc -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #10 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- I'm still down to the gstreamer case, not sure what to do about that from my end, if anything. I will wait for feedback. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #11 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- opencl package management person got back to me, the opencl packages for devel were actually missing, so that was my fault. The pkg-config results for gstreamer do appear to be giving your configure script the paths for 64 bit gstreamer though. i'm trying to see if I can figure out what to do about that. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |INVALID --- Comment #12 from Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio(a)earthlink.net> --- (In reply to Michael Gooch from comment #11)
The pkg-config results for gstreamer do appear to be giving your configure script the paths for 64 bit gstreamer though. i'm trying to see if I can figure out what to do about that.
You need to specify the PKG_CONFIG_PATH when you run ./configure for 32 bit, e.g., on my system (openSUSE) it's PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/lib/pkgconfig. An explanation of why is here: https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2016-January/111245.html. None of what you've posted is a Wine bug, and Bugzilla is not for user support. If you need further help building Wine, ask for it on the forum. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 --- Comment #13 from Michael Gooch <goochmi(a)gmail.com> --- Apologies. I thought it might actually be a wine bug. Was not aware of the need for that as I had thought the configure script would do that sort of path changing upon proper switching of win32 vs win64 builds. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40017 Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #14 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> --- Closing. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (1)
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org