Re: [Shotwell] shotwell for PCLinuxOS Mate

[Gerrit Draisma <gdraisma xs4all nl>]

Hallo Jens,
Thanks.

*This* what I get from rprm -q:
----------
[gerrit@mrbrouwer ~]$ rpm -qa | grep gobject
python-gobject3-3.20.1-2pclos2016
python-gobject-devel-2.28.6-8pclos2016
gobject-introspection-1.46.0-2pclos2016
python-gobject3-devel-3.20.1-2pclos2016
python3-gobject3-devel-3.20.1-2pclos2016
python-gobject-2.28.6-8pclos2016
python3-gobject3-3.20.1-2pclos2016
-----------

And *this* is the reponse from gexiv2/configure
-----------
root@mrbrouwer gexiv2-0.10.4]# ./configure
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
....
checking for gobject-introspection... no
....
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating gexiv2.pc
config.status: executing depfiles commands
config.status: executing libtool commands

GExiv2 will be built with prefix /usr/local for x86_64-pc-linux-gnu 
(cross-compiling: no).

Options:
    Introspection:      no
    Python2 binding:    no (introspection disabled)
    Python3 binding:    no (introspection disabled)
    Tests and utils:    no
-----------

Is there a way to check whether I have the correct
gobject-introspection?

Could I do without?

Thanks, Gerrit


On 04/18/2017 03:53 PM, Jens Georg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > The gexiv2 configure script complained that
> >   gobject-introspection-1.0
> > was missing.
>
> That should be available from your package manager, I would have assumed.
>
> > I obtained a copy from
> > http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gobject-introspection/1.31/
> > and tried to compile that.
> [...]
> > Is there a way forward from here?
>
> Either lower Shotwell's requirements (but be aware that GExiv2 < 0.10.4
> has a nasty bug giving you wrong tags sometimes) or, if you build from a
> release tarball 
> (https://download.gnome.org/sources/gexiv2/0.10/gexiv2-0.10.5.tar.xz),
> you can configure without gobject-introspection and still get the
> vala VAPI file (I hope; not tested)
>
> > In any case seeing all the work that has been done to
> > get shotwell working has deeply impressed me.
>
> sorry about that.