Bring back exiv2 anitya

[flathubbot]

Started test build 61816

[flathubbot]

Build 61816 failed

[Justinzobel]

-- Could NOT find inih (missing: inih_LIBRARY inih_INCLUDE_DIR) 
CMake Error at cmake/Findinih.cmake:28 (message):
  inih library not found

Not found in exiv build.

[travier]

We can disable it like we did for another app I don't remember.

[travier]

https://github.com/flathub/org.gimp.GIMP/blob/6acd6e001967f0934dade222ddadc1f26585a0be/org.gimp.GIMP.json#L319

[flathubbot]

Started test build 63769

[flathubbot]

Started test build 63770

[flathubbot]

Build 63770 successful To test this build, install it from the testing repository:

flatpak install --user https://dl.flathub.org/build-repo/46407/org.kde.okular.flatpakref

[flathubbot]

Build 63769 successful To test this build, install it from the testing repository:

flatpak install --user https://dl.flathub.org/build-repo/46406/org.kde.okular.flatpakref

[travier]

Let's remove the inih dependency instead? It's not used for the library, only for a command line tool that we don't use.

[tsdgeos]

Let's remove the inih dependency instead? It's not used for the library, only for a command line tool that we don't use.

Grepping in the code shows it's used in readExiv2Config which is used in places like CanonMakerNote::printCsLensType, which then i have a bit of trouble tracking where it's used but doesn't seem obvious is for the command line tool only

Is there some docu or something that says inih is only for the command line tool?

[travier]

https://github.com/Exiv2/exiv2/pull/2465

[travier]

https://exiv2.org/manpage.html#config_file

[travier]

https://github.com/flathub/org.gimp.GIMP/commit/4335a0912ccfd53e173703926aabbdafbcf3345f

[tsdgeos]

I'm honestly not convinced :D

Does it hurt us to actually provide the dependencies the library wants?

[Erick555]

It's yet another point of possible failure. Especially when relying on github-generated tarballs.

[tsdgeos]

I don't remember a single problem with github tarballs in all the hundred flathub apps we have, can you point to a place such a problem happened?

[flathubbot]

Started test build 64864

[flathubbot]

Build 64864 successful To test this build, install it from the testing repository:

flatpak install --user https://dl.flathub.org/build-repo/47501/org.kde.okular.flatpakref

[Erick555]

I don't remember a single problem with github tarballs in all the hundred flathub apps we have, can you point to a place such a problem happened?

Perhaps you weren't paying attention to the worldwide news. Note the difference between github auto-generated tarballs and upstream generated tarballs on github. The problem is with the former.