On 10/04/2015 07:20 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: > On 10/03/2015 10:04 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: >> On 08/29/2015 08:11 PM, ToddAndMargo wrote: >>> Anyone get Osmo to run in 7.1? I am missing my "Contacts" >>> tab. (7.1's ".osmo" runs fine in my FC22 VM.) >>> >>> Xfce 4.10 >>> >> >> Finally figured this out: >> >> The make file is missing a dependency for libical. >> >> This contains the whole sorted story: >> https://sourceforge.net/p/osmo-pim/bugs/99/ >> >> I basically downloaded and rebuilt FC22's libical as there are none for >> EL7 (rpm.pbone.net) and installed it: >> >> http://fedora.mirror.lstn.net/releases/22/Everything/source/SRPMS/l/libical-1.0.1-1.fc22.src.rpm >> >> >> >> rpmbuild --rebuild libical-1.0.1-1.fc22.src.rpm >> rpm -ivh libical-1.0.1-1.el7.x86_64.rpm >> >> Then I rebuilt your osmo SRPM, removed and reinstalled. >> >> I asked Nux to include libical in his repo >> >> Many thanks, >> -T >> >> It about killed me to figure this out! >> > > The plot thickens: > > $ rpm -qa libical > libical-0.48-6.el7.x86_64 > > contains "libical.so.0" > Osmo won't start without it (complains about libical.so.0 missing) > > libical-1.0.1-1.el7.x86_64 > > contains "libical.so.1" > Osmo won't give you Contacts without it > > I used "rpm --nodeps -e libical-0.48-6.el7.x86_64" to test this. > > So, poop. There is some reason why rpm thinks > > libical-0.48-6.el7.x86_64.rpm and > libical-1.0.1-1.el7.x86_64.rpm > > are two different pieces of software. I have no clue why, just that > they both have to be installed for Osmo to work. > Osmo's Max just wrote me back: "I think Osmo can be compiled with any version of libical (0.xx and 1.xx). If you build and run it with the same version - you are fine. There is a binary incompatibility between libical 0.xx and 1.xx, so effects could be as you have described. Max Here is a rub! Krusader, use to make me press "end" when renaming a file or it ignored me. Krusader could not figure it out. And guess what also started working when I double installed libical! https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=332537 So who knows!