mercurial vs >= 3.0 deb for Ubuntu 10.04 64 bit

[Augie Fackler]

> On Apr 14, 2016, at 11:54, Arnel <rcl at openmailbox.org> wrote:
> 
> On 14 April 2016 10:32AM, Augie Fackler wrote:
>>> On Apr 13, 2016, at 13:19, Uwe Brauer <oub at mat.ucm.es> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 13 April 2016 11:12AM, Uwe Brauer wrote:  
>>> 
>>>> Is building Mercurial from source completely not an option?  
>>> 
>>> Is is an option, I just had a lot of bad experience upgrading pandoc on
>>> Ubuntu 10.04, so I'd prefer a compiled version, but if there isn't any,
>>> I have to build it my own, since 1.4.1 I consider far too old.  
>> 
>> Note that 'make deb' is a thing you can do in any recent (3.7.x certainly) source tree for hg and (assuming you have the right tools installed) it'll drop out a deb for your current OS. It'll even run the tests before it builds the deb.
>> 
>> (Not sure if that's helpful, but maybe it is?)
> 
> I tried that around a month ago on an Ubuntu 14.04 machine, and it never worked
> for me. Where I was able to get a .deb package from was after running 'sudo
> checkinstall'.
> 
> I'd still like to use it in the future, though. Are there any requirements for
> it?

It should just be the tools to give you a compiler and debhelper. I think https://selenic.com/hg/file/tip/contrib/docker/ubuntu-trusty correctly lists the packages you need to install for the build to work.

Another option (if you have docker) is `make docker-ubuntu-trusty` which should use docker to build a deb for your exact platform (it's mostly by luck that you have something for which we already have a docker rule in the makefile.)

> 
> ----
> Thank you,
> Arnel
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial