Re: [gentoo-user] xsane and sane compile error

2007-06-08 Thread Alan McKinnon
On Thursday 07 June 2007, Dale wrote:
 OK, update.  I did a emerge sane-backends and then it has some config
 files that needed updating and I did that.  After that, the updates
 ran fine.   Maybe it just had to much to drink and got confused for a
 bit.

 I did check the version above before I did the re-emerge though.  So
 it had a good version but just didn't seem to know it yet.

 Thanks for the help.

As a colleague once said:

It's software. You didn't really expect it to work, did you?

:-)

Glad to have been able to help out

-- 
Optimists say the glass is half full,
Pessimists say the glass is half empty,
Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be?

Alan McKinnon
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



Re: [gentoo-user] xsane and sane compile error

2007-06-07 Thread Alan McKinnon
On Thursday 07 June 2007, Dale wrote:
 I'm doing my regular updates and got a strange error that looks like

 some dependency got missed somehow.  This is the error I got:
  checking for stpcpy... yes
  checking for LC_MESSAGES... yes
  checking whether NLS is requested... no
  checking for sane-config... /usr/bin/sane-config
  checking for SANE - version = 1.0.0... no

Odd. sane-config belongs to sane-backends, try re-emerge that one first, 
then emerge xsane.

What's the output of sane-config --version? (the thing may have gotten 
deleted/trashed meanwhile by the elves/spooks/aliens/whathaveyou)

alan

-- 
Optimists say the glass is half full,
Pessimists say the glass is half empty,
Developers say wtf is the glass twice as big as it needs to be?

Alan McKinnon
alan at linuxholdings dot co dot za
+27 82, double three seven, one nine three five
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list



Re: [gentoo-user] xsane and sane compile error

2007-06-07 Thread Dale
Alan McKinnon wrote:
 On Thursday 07 June 2007, Dale wrote:
   
 I'm doing my regular updates and got a strange error that looks like

 some dependency got missed somehow.  This is the error I got:
 
 checking for stpcpy... yes
 checking for LC_MESSAGES... yes
 checking whether NLS is requested... no
 checking for sane-config... /usr/bin/sane-config
 checking for SANE - version = 1.0.0... no
   

 Odd. sane-config belongs to sane-backends, try re-emerge that one first, 
 then emerge xsane.

 What's the output of sane-config --version? (the thing may have gotten 
 deleted/trashed meanwhile by the elves/spooks/aliens/whathaveyou)

 alan

   

Yea, I thought it was weird when I searched the forums and no one else
had this error.  Here is the info you requested:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # sane-config --version
 1.0.18
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / #

I'll do some re-emerging and see what happens.

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-)



Re: [gentoo-user] xsane and sane compile error

2007-06-07 Thread Dale
Dale wrote:
 Alan McKinnon wrote:
 On Thursday 07 June 2007, Dale wrote:
   
 I'm doing my regular updates and got a strange error that looks like

 some dependency got missed somehow.  This is the error I got:
 
 checking for stpcpy... yes
 checking for LC_MESSAGES... yes
 checking whether NLS is requested... no
 checking for sane-config... /usr/bin/sane-config
 checking for SANE - version = 1.0.0... no
   

 Odd. sane-config belongs to sane-backends, try re-emerge that one first, 
 then emerge xsane.

 What's the output of sane-config --version? (the thing may have gotten 
 deleted/trashed meanwhile by the elves/spooks/aliens/whathaveyou)

 alan

   

 Yea, I thought it was weird when I searched the forums and no one else
 had this error.  Here is the info you requested:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / # sane-config --version
 1.0.18
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] / #

 I'll do some re-emerging and see what happens.

 Thanks

 Dale

 :-)  :-)  :-)


OK, update.  I did a emerge sane-backends and then it has some config
files that needed updating and I did that.  After that, the updates ran
fine.   Maybe it just had to much to drink and got confused for a bit.

I did check the version above before I did the re-emerge though.  So it
had a good version but just didn't seem to know it yet. 

Thanks for the help.

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-)