darktable, backports repository,

Questions about software.
User avatar
amnesix
Posts: 184
Joined: 09 Nov 2013 12:46
Location: Berlin
Contact:

darktable, backports repository,

Postby amnesix » 03 Jul 2016 08:52

My problem (although it *is* solved), is following :

I'm using a software (darktable). It is in the repositories at version 1.4.2-1, which is *old*, quasi obsolete, but there is in the backports the current version : 2.0.4-1~bpo8+1

Only, it won't install (I usually use synaptic).

So I used apt on a terminal to try to understand why, and then I saw that there missed 4 packages. So I took the backports repository off, and from Jessie I installed those 4 packages, which I couldn't install while the backports where on. And after that I switched the backports repository back on, and then I could install the 2.0.4-1~bpo8+1 version.

I know this is not SolydX crew's problem, and I know (I asked them) that it is not darktable crew's problem, but I don't know where I should report this problem to Debian.

Maybe you know ?

kurotsugi
Posts: 2267
Joined: 09 Jan 2014 00:17

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby kurotsugi » 03 Jul 2016 11:30

AFAIK the correct way to install something from bpo is using terminal

Code: Select all

apt-get install -t jessie-backport <packagename>
I'm not sure if synaptic is able to do that.

User avatar
amnesix
Posts: 184
Joined: 09 Nov 2013 12:46
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby amnesix » 17 Jan 2018 15:03

To install darktable 2.4.0 on SolydX 9 : add a repository «debian buster»

URI : http://deb.debian.org/debian/
Distribution : buster
Section(s) . non-free contrib main

Then update, install darktable, and then *disable* the new repository.

User avatar
ScottQuier
Posts: 1781
Joined: 18 Jul 2013 15:55
Location: Newport News, VA

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby ScottQuier » 18 Jan 2018 14:32

amnesix wrote:To install darktable 2.4.0 on SolydX 9 : add a repository «debian buster»

URI : http://deb.debian.org/debian/
Distribution : buster
Section(s) . non-free contrib main

Then update, install darktable, and then *disable* the new repository.
While this might work in the short-term, it's my understanding this is not best practice. There are at least two options that are better:
  1. Install from backports per the clues provided by kurotsugi. There may be a small number of missing dependencies in a new/clean install. Just install them from the regular repos and life is good.
  2. The other option I've used is to download the source from their PPA and compile it on your target computer. Yes, I know, people have been led to believe PPAs are a bad thing (see my signature ;) ). And this is true, for the most part, if one is attempting to install binaries from a PPA. There are instructions on their web site "install" page with more clues found on this page. Or you can take a look at the tutorial I wrote some time ago. Some things may have change a small amount (like version numbers), but I believe the process will, in the main, work. I've not done it in a while, because the version in backports meets my needs, so YMMV.
BTW - doing a "make install" is usually not considered "best practice". Much better to go the extra mile to compile/build to a .deb file and then use either dpkg or gdebi to do the installation.
Scott
Quoting zerozero, "The usage of PPA's in debian-based
systems is risky at best and entails serious compatibility
problems; usually it's the best way to destroy an install"

User avatar
amnesix
Posts: 184
Joined: 09 Nov 2013 12:46
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby amnesix » 18 Jan 2018 14:38

The version provided by the backports is, if I'm not wrong, 2.2.x. I wanted the 2.4 version. :)

User avatar
ScottQuier
Posts: 1781
Joined: 18 Jul 2013 15:55
Location: Newport News, VA

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby ScottQuier » 19 Jan 2018 13:42

It appears (see this page) you are correct. They show 2.2.5 in backports.

Given that, I would compile from source. It's not hard and doesn't take too long a time. I think the last time I did it (about a year ago) it took about 5 minutes to compile to the .deb file.
Scott
Quoting zerozero, "The usage of PPA's in debian-based
systems is risky at best and entails serious compatibility
problems; usually it's the best way to destroy an install"

User avatar
amnesix
Posts: 184
Joined: 09 Nov 2013 12:46
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby amnesix » 19 Jan 2018 14:10

And there were also dependencies. So I chose the Buster way. So far, no problem. I'm not comfortable with compiling series of dependencies. Also could create a conflict, I believe.

User avatar
ScottQuier
Posts: 1781
Joined: 18 Jul 2013 15:55
Location: Newport News, VA

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby ScottQuier » 19 Jan 2018 16:13

And now you've got me wondering....

I'm going to have to attempt a compile of the latest version just to see if the process I have used in the past still works. This could be interesting.
Scott
Quoting zerozero, "The usage of PPA's in debian-based
systems is risky at best and entails serious compatibility
problems; usually it's the best way to destroy an install"

kurotsugi
Posts: 2267
Joined: 09 Jan 2014 00:17

Re: darktable, backports repository,

Postby kurotsugi » 20 Jan 2018 05:39

since the target is to get v2.4...that trick is fine as long as the dependency allow it. the only disadvantages is that you won't receive security updates for darktable. though, there's a potential breakage on the next debian release.


Return to “Software”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests