FileZilla 3 Linux binary test

Moderator: Project members

Message
Author
Swatinem
504 Command not implemented
Posts: 10
Joined: 2005-01-14 14:39

#31 Post by Swatinem » 2005-01-20 16:49

Paully:
i'm not sure maybe you have to unmask some packages. Maybe even keyword them as ~x86.
Sorry i can't look right now i currently have windows running :D

I think an official ebuild will only be available when FZ3 is final. So we have to wait a little longer ;)

panfr
503 Bad sequence of commands
Posts: 21
Joined: 2004-03-26 08:56

#32 Post by panfr » 2005-01-23 08:07

The rightclick context menus disappeared in the 2005-01-23 nightly build...

CaCO3
500 Command not understood
Posts: 1
Joined: 2005-04-22 18:35

#33 Post by CaCO3 » 2005-04-22 18:38

the nightbuild from 22.03.05 works on my kanotix (debian sid).

But the tree-view still is emty.
is this normal or is something missing?
I want to have a ftp-client on linux with this feature.
kbear has it, but it crashs to often (on kde 3.4) :(


P.S.
I found a bug:
Filezilla could not follow a link on my server: "www -> public_html"

Confuse
500 Command not understood
Posts: 2
Joined: 2005-10-28 00:43

Ubuntu Breezy and FileZilla3

#34 Post by Confuse » 2005-10-28 00:50

his is the output I get when I try to run the CVS build of filezilla for linux

damian@pompey:~/filezilla3/bin$ ./filezilla
./filezilla: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.6' not found (required by ./filezilla)


I'm running the latest up to date Ubuntu Breezy. Anyone know what to do?

Anders
550 Permission denied
Posts: 27
Joined: 2004-04-06 21:13

#35 Post by Anders » 2005-11-06 09:32

I also get this error (missing libstdc++.so.6) , and previously I've seen it in relations to differing GCC builds. I poked around with that trying to solve this but didn't really get anywhere.

[edit] yep not using gcc 3.4 which means I don't have libstdcc++.so.6[/edit]

~Anders

AlmightyMaximus
450 Internal Error
Posts: 39
Joined: 2004-08-18 15:53

Re: Ubuntu Breezy and FileZilla3

#36 Post by AlmightyMaximus » 2005-11-21 03:26

Confuse wrote:his is the output I get when I try to run the CVS build of filezilla for linux

damian@pompey:~/filezilla3/bin$ ./filezilla
./filezilla: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.6' not found (required by ./filezilla)


I'm running the latest up to date Ubuntu Breezy. Anyone know what to do?
bump for resolution here. same deal, same distro

Superracingteam
150 Opening data channel
Posts: 55
Joined: 2004-05-18 15:41

#37 Post by Superracingteam » 2005-11-21 18:39

Anders wrote:I also get this error (missing libstdc++.so.6) , and previously I've seen it in relations to differing GCC builds. I poked around with that trying to solve this but didn't really get anywhere.

[edit] yep not using gcc 3.4 which means I don't have libstdcc++.so.6[/edit]

~Anders
you need to install g++3.4 (and hope to an update to 3.4.6 from ubuntu)
Once ubuntu have updated it to g++3.4.6 (now it is 3.4.4) it should work (As far as I know)

Anders
550 Permission denied
Posts: 27
Joined: 2004-04-06 21:13

#38 Post by Anders » 2005-11-21 22:29

well I'm deffinantly not using ubuntu so I don't think that applies, and if you read the quote you quoted I clearly say that the issue is not having 3.4. But running gentoo where gcc is such an integral part of the OS I'm rather reluctant to leave the stable path for little or no gain. Rather I'll just compile my own later.

:)

~Anders

User avatar
botg
Site Admin
Posts: 35509
Joined: 2004-02-23 20:49
First name: Tim
Last name: Kosse

#39 Post by botg » 2005-11-21 22:50

What I've learned with the linux binaries is the following:

I won't publish Linux binaries at all in future, that's task of the vendor of your Linux distribution. I'll just supply the source, every Linux user should be able to compile it.

Anders
550 Permission denied
Posts: 27
Joined: 2004-04-06 21:13

#40 Post by Anders » 2005-11-21 23:05

I think it would be great to post an autopackage of filezilla. And not becuase I think that it's going to get out to a lot of people that way. But becaust I think it's a good idea for desktop use, and I think that the more packages that add support the better we can expect that service to become.

I have little or no idea how much work that is, if it turns out to be relatively simple that would be great. Otherwise in every distribution I've used I've relied almost entirely on their package management systems to retrieve software, and it's those tools that have typicaly made linux such a joy for me to use.

Not really sure where I'm going with this.

Conclusion:
I) If autopackage is easy to set up I think it would be a great idea.
II) I think that a vast majority of the time people use their package managers to retrieve software, and in the cases where they don't compilation is not out of line.

Thanks!
~Anders

AlmightyMaximus
450 Internal Error
Posts: 39
Joined: 2004-08-18 15:53

#41 Post by AlmightyMaximus » 2005-11-22 01:19

botg wrote:What I've learned with the linux binaries is the following:

I won't publish Linux binaries at all in future, that's task of the vendor of your Linux distribution. I'll just supply the source, every Linux user should be able to compile it.

do it like wine

Code: Select all

cd filezilla3
./fz3install
for those that know (or care)
they can ./configure, make, make install, install

User avatar
botg
Site Admin
Posts: 35509
Joined: 2004-02-23 20:49
First name: Tim
Last name: Kosse

#42 Post by botg » 2005-11-22 08:39

Anders wrote:I think it would be great to post an autopackage of filezilla.
There's one big problem: Each distribution has different versions of the system libraries and also the compiler version changes. Especially the compiler version differences cause problems due to ABI incompatibilities. It's just not possible to create Linux binaries that will fit everywhere.

Anders
550 Permission denied
Posts: 27
Joined: 2004-04-06 21:13

#43 Post by Anders » 2005-11-22 18:48

There's one big problem: Each distribution has different versions of the system libraries and also the compiler version changes. Especially the compiler version differences cause problems due to ABI incompatibilities. It's just not possible to create Linux binaries that will fit everywhere.
Completely understandable.

ZephyrXero
500 Syntax error
Posts: 16
Joined: 2005-03-19 17:49
Location: Hattiesburg, MS, USA

#44 Post by ZephyrXero » 2005-11-28 19:42

And for those few and far between cases where an autopackage will not work those users can simply regress back to the old ways of Linux by either compiling it themselves or waiting forever and a day for someone to graciously add FZ to their distro's repository. As the number of programs for Linux continue to grow expotentially Autopackage or something like it is really the only sane option for most users.

User avatar
botg
Site Admin
Posts: 35509
Joined: 2004-02-23 20:49
First name: Tim
Last name: Kosse

#45 Post by botg » 2005-11-29 09:24

The only viable option for most users is to use the package management system of the distribution they are using.
It's a lot of work to provide linux binaries as you've seen in this thread. Autopackage wouldn't have helped at all here.

Post Reply