[Digikam-devel] Bug#390703: ubuntu digikam no longer requires libgphoto-2-2-dev

Achim Bohnet ach at mpe.mpg.de
Wed Jun 27 19:26:54 BST 2007

On Wednesday, 27. June 2007, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 05:39:20PM +0100, Mark Purcell wrote:
> > Luka,
> > 
> > I see from the ubuntu changelog for digikam that you claim that you no longer 
> > need the libgphoto .la files due to the difference in the way the Kubuntu KDE 
> > has been built.
> > 
> > I can confirm I am still having this problem in Debian with the 0.9.2 final 
> > release package.
> > 
> > Can you provide some details so we can get this fixed in Debian?
> I've not looked into this myself, but there's nothing I know of that
> Ubuntu does which should make any difference.  I asked Matthias Klose

Best hint we have up to now is Marcus Meissners msg from 19 Jan
in this bug report thread:

  Further investigations shows a conflict between the KDE builtin libltdl
  (in libkdecore) and the external ones and how libgphoto2 uses it.

Marcus: can you elaborate how you found this out?  Makes for us (or is it
only me?) 'glueless' hopefully easier to compare kubuntu and debian to find
out what needs to be changed in debian.

> who suggested Ubuntu might happen to have a reference to the gphoto.so
> file which Debian doesn't.  I can see in /usr/lib/libdigikam.la
> dependency_libs='.../usr/lib/libgphoto2.la /usr/lib/libexif.la
> /usr/lib/libgphoto2_port.la...' but I have neither of those files
> installed so I'm at a bit of a loss what the difference could be.

Not the build-deps of digikam on disk? ;)

(0) ~ $ dpkg -L libgphoto2-2-dev | grep la


> Jonathan
  To me vi is Zen.  To use vi is to practice zen. Every command is
  a koan. Profound to the user, unintelligible to the uninitiated.
  You discover truth everytime you use it.
                                      -- reddy at lion.austin.ibm.com

More information about the Digikam-devel mailing list