Discussion:
Why was xv removed?
(too old to reply)
John Forkosh
2021-02-03 13:43:10 UTC
Permalink
From ChangeLog.txt
+--------------------------+
Fri Oct 18 21:00:50 UTC 2019
...
xap/xv-3.10a-x86_64-9.txz: Removed.
...
+--------------------------+
So why was it removed? I cp'ed it from /usr/bin/xv
of an earlier (pre-Oct18,2019) 64-current, and it
continues to work fine and be very useful (for me
at least).
--
John Forkosh ( mailto: ***@f.com where j=john and f=forkosh )
Henrik Carlqvist
2021-02-03 17:23:49 UTC
Permalink
From ChangeLog.txt +--------------------------+
Fri Oct 18 21:00:50 UTC 2019 ...
xap/xv-3.10a-x86_64-9.txz: Removed.
...
+--------------------------+
So why was it removed? I cp'ed it from /usr/bin/xv of an earlier
(pre-Oct18,2019) 64-current, and it continues to work fine and be very
useful (for me at least).
I'm only guessing, but my guess is that it no longer compiles from
source. The fact that an old binary still runs does not mean that its
source would compile with a new compiler and new glibc with latest header
files.

Version 3.10a of xv is from 1994.

Looking at
ftp://ftp.slackware.com/pub/slackware/slackware-14.2/source/xap/xv/
you will find beside the source package a number of patches from others
than the original maintainer. Some of those patches add functionality
like support for .png files. However, I am sure that some patches are
there to make it compile in an environment newer than a 1994 Unix system.
Unmaintained source code suffers from bit rot stops working.

Like you I will miss xv, I use it every week. It is the most convenient
toll to have a quick glance at an image and it is also a very convenient
tool to make and save screenshots.

It might also be worth noting that even though the source is available
for xv it has a shareware-like license which is free for personal use
only. Commercial users of xv must pay to the original author.

regards Henrik
Eli the Bearded
2021-02-03 20:12:37 UTC
Permalink
In alt.os.linux.slackware,
Post by Henrik Carlqvist
I'm only guessing, but my guess is that it no longer compiles from
source. The fact that an old binary still runs does not mean that its
source would compile with a new compiler and new glibc with latest header
files.
This sounds plausible. I recall a bit of complexity when I tried to get
it running on Ubuntu using a Slack source package. That was three to
four years ago, I think.
Post by Henrik Carlqvist
Unmaintained source code suffers from bit rot stops working.
Alas, too often true.
Post by Henrik Carlqvist
Like you I will miss xv, I use it every week. It is the most convenient
toll to have a quick glance at an image and it is also a very convenient
tool to make and save screenshots.
I found it was very fast for image croping, which is why I wanted it on
Ubuntu. For image viewing I like feh, and for screenshots maim. (The maim
tool is "an improved scrot", and feh and scrot share are from the same
author.)

Elijah
------
got xv running, but doesn't remember what the issue was
andrew
2021-02-03 22:52:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Henrik Carlqvist
I'm only guessing, but my guess is that it no longer compiles from
source. The fact that an old binary still runs does not mean that its
source would compile with a new compiler and new glibc with latest header
files.
I downloaded the source, patches and SlackBuild for 14.2 and I can
confirm that it does not compile on -current. Interestingly enough our
Arch colleagues are still packaging it:

https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=xv

Andrew
--
Do you think that's air you're breathing?
Rich
2021-02-04 05:13:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by andrew
Post by Henrik Carlqvist
I'm only guessing, but my guess is that it no longer compiles from
source. The fact that an old binary still runs does not mean that
its source would compile with a new compiler and new glibc with
latest header files.
I downloaded the source, patches and SlackBuild for 14.2 and I can
confirm that it does not compile on -current. Interestingly enough
https://aur.archlinux.org/cgit/aur.git/tree/PKGBUILD?h=xv
I wonder if we could pickup from Arch the mods they likely are making
to get it to compile?

I've used xv for image viewing/screenshotting/simple edits (cropping
mostly) since forever. It will be sorely missed.
andrew
2021-02-04 06:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich
I wonder if we could pickup from Arch the mods they likely are making
to get it to compile?
I follwed in Arch's footsteps but struck a compilation eror:

make: *** No rule to make target 'bits/br_bzip2', needed by 'xvbrowse.o'. Stop.

I could not solve this, perhaps wiser heads than mine can>?

Andrew
--
Do you think that's air you're breathing?
John Forkosh
2021-02-04 06:40:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by andrew
Post by Rich
I wonder if we could pickup from Arch the mods they likely are making
to get it to compile?
make: *** No rule to make target 'bits/br_bzip2',
needed by 'xvbrowse.o'. Stop.
I could not solve this, perhaps wiser heads than mine can>?
Andrew
Thanks for all the info, guys. That looks like a makefile error,
so the C source code may (or may not) still be compilable without
errors. I have the 64-current/source/xap/xv/ stuff from 01-sep-2109,
but haven't drilled down much. But note that there's a whole vms
configuration, and I'd give at least 50-50 odds that it still
builds okay under vms, whose tools have remained much more
stable/static. And if that's the case, then there's probably
a pretty simple linux fix -- once you figure out what needs fixing.
Anyway, I also have the 64-current 01-sep-2019 xv executable,
which runs fine, just cp'ing it to /usr/bin/ of a current release,
i.e., no missing libs or anything, it "just works". So if anybody
still wants/needs that, followup here and I'll upload a copy.
--
John Forkosh ( mailto: ***@f.com where j=john and f=forkosh )
Robert Komar
2021-02-04 17:41:40 UTC
Permalink
I still see the xv package in extra/xv/. No need to compile the source
on my end.

Cheers,
Rob Komar
andrew
2021-02-04 21:40:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Komar
I still see the xv package in extra/xv/. No need to compile the source
on my end.
Oops, so it is :)

Andrew
--
Do you think that's air you're breathing?
John Forkosh
2021-02-05 10:12:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by andrew
Post by Robert Komar
I still see the xv package in extra/xv/. No need to compile the source
on my end.
Oops, so it is :)
Andrew
My bad, right you are, Robert, I see it there, too,
now that I actually look. (And it's the identical
executable in /usr/bin/xv that I have from 01-sep-2019.)
Guess my original question here was kind of superfluous.
--
John Forkosh ( mailto: ***@f.com where j=john and f=forkosh )
Henrik Carlqvist
2021-02-05 18:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Forkosh
Guess my original question here was kind of superfluous.
Still, looking carefully at the changelog, there is an explanation to
your question:

+--------------------------+
Fri Oct 18 21:00:50 UTC 2019
a/getty-ps-2.1.0b-i586-4.txz: Removed.
a/lha-114i-i586-2.txz: Removed.
Removed due to vague licensing terms.
...
xap/xfractint-20.04p13-i586-2.txz: Removed.
xap/xv-3.10a-i586-9.txz: Removed.
extra/getty-ps/getty-ps-2.1.0b-i586-4.txz: Rebuilt.
Moved here from the A series due to commercial use restrictions.
extra/xfractint/xfractint-20.04p14-i586-1.txz: Upgraded.
Moved here from the XAP series due to commercial use restrictions.
extra/xv/xv-3.10a-i586-9.txz: Rebuilt.
Moved here from the XAP series due to non-commercial use shareware
license.
+--------------------------+

So it was moved to /extra/ because of its shareware license for non-
commercial users and payware license for commersial users.

regards Henrik

Loading...