client
client copied to clipboard
[Debian] owncloud Client 5.2.1 has no images
Pre-submission Checks
- [X] I checked for similar issues, but could not find any. I also checked the closed issues. I could not contribute additional information to any existing issue.
- [X] I will take the time to fill in all the required fields. I know that the bug report may be dismissed otherwise due to lack of information.
Describe the bug
Hello,
While trying to get owncloud client 5.2.1 working in Debian (unstable, testing), I achieved a built version which has no images, be it in the client itself or its systray icon.
It seems the way resources are handled changed between the versions not supporting Qt6 and those supporting Qt6.
I'm not able yet to identify where the underlying issue is. Could someone, eg @TheOneRing who already helped me once on building 5.2.1 properly, help me to try backtracking the issue?
Any advice is welcome!
Expected behavior
I'd expect to have pretty images, but none appear
Steps to reproduce the issue
No response
Screenshots
No response
Logs
No response
Client version number
5.2.1.13040+dfsg-1
Desktop environment (Linux only)
No response
Client package version and origin (Linux only)
No response
Installation path (Windows only)
No response
Server information
No response
Additional context
No response
Can you check whether the qt6 svg module is installed?
Can you check whether the qt6 svg module is installed?
Well spotted, I was missing it.
It seems the way I used to collect new dependencies is flaky. I've yet to find a file that lists the requirements for owncloud-client, did I miss something in the repo?
I usually rely on the CMakeList.txt, when building packages myself but runtime dependencies like QSvg or qt6-image-formats-plugins are usually not covered by cmake... Is there a best practice pattern we should follow here?
The 6.0 client introduces a dependency to qml, wich on debian based systems is split up into a gazillion of packages (qml6-module-qtqml-*)
Not sure on how to communicate something like that...
@TheOneRing any documentation file listing dependencies would be fine I guess. :)
I admit for compiled programs I see no clear standards being widely used
@TheOneRing would you be fine with such a solution?
If such a list is not kept in sync with reality, it hurts more than it helps, so I'm not sure that's the best solution....
Is it a new bug or is it here? The debian overlay package wants to have the owncloud-client version of 5.2.1+oc-13040, but there is not this version, there is only owncloud-client_5.2.1.13040.deb without '+oc-'.
dpkg-deb --info ./owncloud-client-overlays-icons_5.2.1+oc-13040_all.deb
neues Debian-Paket, Version 2.0.
Größe 193008 Byte: control-Archiv= 1832 Byte.
354 Byte, 11 Zeilen control
5277 Byte, 58 Zeilen md5sums
Package: owncloud-client-overlays-icons
Source: owncloud-client-overlays
Version: 5.2.1+oc-13040
Architecture: all
Maintainer: Jürgen Weigert <[email protected]>
Installed-Size: 279
Suggests: owncloud-client (= 5.2.1+oc-13040), nautilus
Section: devel
Priority: optional
Description: nautilus plugin for owncloud
This package contains the overlay icons.
Because it is only a suggestion, it is possible to install..
Is it a new bug or is it here? The debian overlay package wants to have the owncloud-client version of 5.2.1+oc-13040, but there is not this version, there is only owncloud-client_5.2.1.13040.deb without '+oc-'.
dpkg-deb --info ./owncloud-client-overlays-icons_5.2.1+oc-13040_all.deb neues Debian-Paket, Version 2.0. Größe 193008 Byte: control-Archiv= 1832 Byte. 354 Byte, 11 Zeilen control 5277 Byte, 58 Zeilen md5sums Package: owncloud-client-overlays-icons Source: owncloud-client-overlays Version: 5.2.1+oc-13040 Architecture: all Maintainer: Jürgen Weigert <[email protected]> Installed-Size: 279 Suggests: owncloud-client (= 5.2.1+oc-13040), nautilus Section: devel Priority: optional Description: nautilus plugin for owncloud This package contains the overlay icons.Because it is only a suggestion, it is possible to install..
Unrelated to this issue please open a new issue and provide an extended description.
This issue was marked stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. Remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 7 days.
The issue was marked as stale for 7 days and closed automatically.