Bug#788703: d-i/cdebconf vs. gtk3/libepoxy?

[Cyril Brulebois]

Hi again,

Cyril Brulebois <kibi at debian.org> (2016-01-11):
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu at debian.org> (2015-06-14):
> > gtk+ 3.0 now depends on libepoxy, so we need a libepoxy udeb.
> 
> The attached patch seems to do the trick. With it I was able to rebuild
> gtk+3.0 so that its udeb gets the proper dependency, and to build a
> netboot-gtk mini.iso Debian Installer image with the resulting udebs.
> 
> I'm getting a black screen at start-up though, which might just be
> insufficient or incorrect porting in the cdebconf gtk frontend when
> built against gtk3. This will be discussed on debian-boot@:
>   https://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2016/01/msg00214.html

There was an issue in cdebconf indeed, see report at:
  https://lists.debian.org/20160111032435.GD8642@mraw.org

Next issue: It seems we need libGL.so.1 so that something built against
gtk3 has a chance of being displayed (through libepoxy presumably, given
its purpose/description) → now getting ENOENT and a retry loop, which is
a different kind of black screen in d-i.

If that was at all possible, it would be nice if we could avoid pulling
mesa inside d-i, and maybe disable libepoxy in src:gtk+3.0 for its udeb.
libepoxy doesn't seem to be optional there though…

If that can't be done, sticking with gtk2 might be an option… :(

Mraw,
KiBi.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20160111/2f54dd0f/attachment.sig>