app install unable to see nfs volumes

• Mar 18, 2018 - 01:01

I have no problem installing th latest Musescore on any Linux distro except Debian, which always failed.
(Maybe that can be cleaned up)

I therefore run the binary musescore-app-image for my architecture.
It works fine and helps to place a plaster on the Debian installation problems so it is workable.

However, the HUGE problem with the app-install is that for some reason when I want to open a file none of my NFS volumes show up. Typing the full NFS path to the file in the command line at the bottom of the File-Open dialog also says no file found...
Usually I would say this a system window manager problem, but this ONLY happens with musescore-app-image, so the dialog must most likely be musescore sourced.

All other applications access the NFS volumes always and easy.


Hi, Debian maintainer of MuseScore here. I’d rather try to debug that, but do make sure you run at least Debian stable (9 “stretch”) as older versions are almost impossible to support (I’ll try for a jessie backport when 2.2 is out, but can’t promise it will end up successfully).

As for containerised applications, I’d expect extra mountpoints to not show up, that’s basically their design.

In reply to by mirabilos

I really cannot see why the binary app-version it would exclude NFS. Makes absolutely no sense. Sounds like it is a windows binary running under some sort of emulation as windows do not really entertain NFS well. It is a pity as it works great otherwise, but all my files are on NFS, as they should be.

Its not that easy or prudent to just always upgrade Debian as you suggest.
There is no reason it cannot run on Jesse.
Jesse is great and stable and works with my 24-core rackservers reliably ( where I am definitely not changing it.)
Sid has all sorts and sports of issues I am not willing to go to. Cannot even find my video cards and ethernet controllers, while Jesse has no problem.

I am not asking anyone to debug it for me.
I am just a bit amused by the fact that the installer has no obvious dependency check before attempting an install. What happened to good o'l ./configure -type compiling the source ?
If the installer checks dependency (as only the developers know what is really needed) and prints it out at compile time e.g. like good old ./configure did when people were still clever enough to use it, then it will be a piece of cake for me to debug it myself and then I dont have to write a message like this at all.

So, does a standalone or accurate dependency check exists? If not why not as it is the only way I can fix this myself?
Is there a complete dependency list printed somewhere. What I saw doesnt satisfy what 2.0 needs at all.
If someone can show me the dependency list it would be all I need to install 2.0 on Jesse as I would know which libraries to upgrade.

In reply to by mirabilos

My question was really about compiling from SOURCE.
My question was about if there is a documented list of dependencies issued for each version of musescore.

I obviously have backports installed but it gives me version 1.3
I will try again, and didnt really ask for any effort, other than a list of dependencies so I can install it from source.

I think you want me to pipe over an existing directory : sudo dd of=/etc !?
No problem I will change the command, but it is dangerous to dd to an existing directory.

In reply to by mirabilos

Thanks for the missing of= for dd. Makes a huge difference between destroying my entire /etc directory and creating the necessary files in it.

Yes sure Cmake gives you the interwoven error messages, but it will give you specific libraries that are not generally stand alone and parts of larger packages.

The competent way to do this is to make all the packages and libraries needed to compile in a list available with the source.
I mean, if you wrote it what bit extra effort is it to just list the dependencies. In the long term it saves time .. eg having to be entertained by a post like this e.g.
That way anyone that is an old hand at unix or that routinely compile from source has a chance of installing the software without any help.

In reply to by mirabilos

Please write the dd in your post so it doesnt wrap at /etc
It can cause great damage if executed like that for anyone reading this post later and blindly trying it. dd of=/etc is dangerous to leave as advice as it will bring down the OS.

In reply to by mirabilos

How about your "maybe he can find the edit button" snark"

Then the condescending Uhmmm... stab

and now the serious one if it was intentional;
Writing this hoping I will execute it ?????????
echo deb jessie-backports main | sudo dd of=/etc

Fine whatever, doesnt matter.
Maybe you should change your provocative attitude, if you still can.

Jojo already helped me, quick without antics and to the point as he actually read my question.. I asked about SOURCE.


In reply to by mirabilos

Well, calling me names and then on second thought removing it, followed by a big bravado as you run out the door is a good first step in becoming a better person.
I was hoping for something better.
Just dont contribute to any of my posts.
I dont need aggravation. Condescending uhmms, proxy donkey-hat edit-button innuendo and sarcasm and the obvious wrap phish...( a really ooooold one )
There are plenty people who actually help me very fast as you can see and who actually read my question and answered it to the point.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.