Bug#682726: [linux-source-3.4] make xconfig: "Unable to find the QT4 tool qmake."

Filipus Klutiero

unread,

Jul 24, 2012, 9:50:01 PM7/24/12

to

Package: linux-source-3.4
Version: 3.4.4-1~experimental.1
Severity: normal

When trying to run make xconfig with qt4-qmake installed, make is unable
to find qmake:

> $ which qmake;LANG=C make xconfig
> /usr/bin/qmake
> CHECK qt
> * Unable to find the QT4 tool qmake. Trying to use QT3
> *
> * Unable to find any QT installation. Please make sure that
> * the QT4 or QT3 development package is correctly installed and
> * either qmake can be found or install pkg-config or set
> * the QTDIR environment variable to the correct location.
> *
> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `scripts/kconfig/.tmp_qtcheck',
> needed by `scripts/kconfig/qconf.o'. Stop.
> make: *** [xconfig] Error 2
> chealer@vinci:~/sources/linux-source-3.4$

--- System information. ---
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-3-amd64

Debian Release: wheezy/sid
990 testing security.debian.org
990 testing debian.mirror.iweb.ca
500 unstable debian.mirror.iweb.ca
1 experimental debian.mirror.iweb.ca

--- Package information. ---
Depends (Version) | Installed
=======================-+-===========
binutils | 2.22-6.1
bzip2 | 1.0.6-3

Recommends (Version) | Installed
=========================-+-===========
libc6-dev | 2.13-33
OR libc-dev |
gcc | 4:4.7.1-1
make | 3.81-8.2

Suggests (Version) | Installed
=============================-+-===========
libncurses-dev |
OR ncurses-dev |
libqt4-dev | 4:4.8.2-1

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listm...@lists.debian.org

Ben Hutchings

unread,

Jul 24, 2012, 11:00:02 PM7/24/12

to

On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 21:44 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Package: linux-source-3.4
> Version: 3.4.4-1~experimental.1
> Severity: normal
>
> When trying to run make xconfig with qt4-qmake installed, make is unable
> to find qmake:

[...]

Works for me. Which version of pkg-config do you have?

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
If more than one person is responsible for a bug, no one is at fault.

signature.asc

Filipus Klutiero

unread,

Jul 24, 2012, 11:20:02 PM7/24/12

to

On 2012-07-24 22:48, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 21:44 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>> Package: linux-source-3.4
>> Version: 3.4.4-1~experimental.1
>> Severity: normal
>>
>> When trying to run make xconfig with qt4-qmake installed, make is unable
>> to find qmake:
> [...]
>
> Works for me. Which version of pkg-config do you have?
>
> Ben.
>

None. Installing pkg-config works around.

Filipus Klutiero

unread,

Sep 18, 2012, 8:20:02 PM9/18/12

to

On 2012-09-18 14:30, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> which was filed against the linux-source-3.4 package:
>
> #682726: [linux-source-3.4] make xconfig: "Unable to find the QT4 tool qmake."
>
> It has been closed by Ben Hutchings<b...@decadent.org.uk>.
>
> Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
> If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
> better one in a separate message then please contact Ben Hutchings<b...@decadent.org.uk> by
> replying to this email.
>
>

I understand that suggesting pkg-config might reduce the prevalence of
this bug, but how would that solve it?

Ben Hutchings

unread,

Sep 19, 2012, 2:00:01 AM9/19/12

to

On Tue, 2012-09-18 at 20:10 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> On 2012-09-18 14:30, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> > This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> > which was filed against the linux-source-3.4 package:
> >
> > #682726: [linux-source-3.4] make xconfig: "Unable to find the QT4 tool qmake."
> >
> > It has been closed by Ben Hutchings<b...@decadent.org.uk>.
> >
> > Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
> > If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
> > better one in a separate message then please contact Ben Hutchings<b...@decadent.org.uk> by
> > replying to this email.
> >
> >
>
> I understand that suggesting pkg-config might reduce the prevalence of
> this bug, but how would that solve it?

There is no solution to the problem of 'optional dependencies'; this is
the best you're going to get.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
The world is coming to an end. Please log off.

signature.asc

Filipus Klutiero

unread,

Sep 20, 2012, 12:30:02 AM9/20/12

to

reopen 682726
thanks

If by 'optional dependencies' you mean assuming a feature provided by a
package on which the dependency is not declared as absolute, there are
certainly solutions; declare the dependency as absolute or stop assuming
the feature's presence.

Note that the absence of a solution for a bug, even if it would be real,
would not solve the bug.

Jonathan Nieder

unread,

Sep 20, 2012, 12:40:01 AM9/20/12

to

Hi,

Filipus Klutiero wrote:

> If by 'optional dependencies' you mean assuming a feature provided by a
> package on which the dependency is not declared as absolute, there are
> certainly solutions; declare the dependency as absolute or stop assuming the
> feature's presence.

Neither of those would be appropriate in this case.

However, if you'd like to improve the error message, that would
probably be a welcome change upstream. Upstream would be the place to
propose such a change (with a patch); it does not seem worth tracking
in Debian.

Thanks for your help,
Jonathan

Uwe Kleine-König

unread,

Sep 20, 2012, 11:30:01 AM9/20/12

to

On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 12:16:14AM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> reopen 682726
> thanks
>
> On 2012-09-19 01:48, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >On Tue, 2012-09-18 at 20:10 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> >>On 2012-09-18 14:30, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> >>>This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
> >>>which was filed against the linux-source-3.4 package:
> >>>
> >>>#682726: [linux-source-3.4] make xconfig: "Unable to find the QT4 tool qmake."
> >>>
> >>>It has been closed by Ben Hutchings<b...@decadent.org.uk>.
> >>>
> >>>Their explanation is attached below along with your original report.
> >>>If this explanation is unsatisfactory and you have not received a
> >>>better one in a separate message then please contact Ben Hutchings<b...@decadent.org.uk> by
> >>>replying to this email.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>I understand that suggesting pkg-config might reduce the prevalence of
> >>this bug, but how would that solve it?
> >There is no solution to the problem of 'optional dependencies'; this is
> >the best you're going to get.
> >
> >Ben.
> >
> If by 'optional dependencies' you mean assuming a feature provided
> by a package on which the dependency is not declared as absolute,
> there are certainly solutions; declare the dependency as absolute or
> stop assuming the feature's presence.

It's not a hard dependency because you can use the package in question
in a sensible way without pkg-config. (E.g. by sticking to nconfig) So
adding a dependency isn't right.

Debian-Policy says:

The Depends field should be used if the depended-on package is required
for the depending package to provide a significant amount of
functionality.

[...] [Suggests] is used to declare that one package may be more
useful with one or more others. Using this field tells the
packaging system and the user that the listed packages are
related to this one and can perhaps enhance its usefulness, but
that installing this one without them is perfectly reasonable.

So it seems the decision depends on qconfig being "significant" or not.
IMHO Suggests is fine.

Best regards
Uwe

--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K�nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |

Filipus Klutiero

unread,

Sep 20, 2012, 10:00:01 PM9/20/12

to

Hi Uwe,

I understand your reasoning, but if we read policy carefully, we notice
that while is says Depends should be used in certain cases, it does not
say that this list is exhaustive. In other words, it says Depends should
be used in certain cases, but it does not say Depends should be used in
and only in these cases.

> IMHO Suggests is fine.

The package currently assumes that pkg-config is installed. The packages
assumed by linux-source must be listed in its Depends. But, I agree
linux-source can be useful without pkg-config, and a suggestion should
be fine if we can eliminate all assumptions of pkg-config.

Filipus Klutiero

unread,

Sep 20, 2012, 10:00:01 PM9/20/12

to

Hi Jonathan,

On 2012-09-20 00:36, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>
>> If by 'optional dependencies' you mean assuming a feature provided by a
>> package on which the dependency is not declared as absolute, there are
>> certainly solutions; declare the dependency as absolute or stop assuming the
>> feature's presence.
> Neither of those would be appropriate in this case.

If the former is inappropriate, the latter is certainly appropriate.

>
> However, if you'd like to improve the error message, that would
> probably be a welcome change upstream. Upstream would be the place to
> propose such a change (with a patch); it does not seem worth tracking
> in Debian.

Feel free, but note that a bug in Debian's Linux does not necessarily
imply a bug in Linux upstream. Upstream may consider pkg-config as a
dependency, or may have implicit dependencies. However, I agree that a
change upstream sounds like the optimal way to fix.