Re: INSTALL question

On Tuesday 02 April 2002 4:35 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS Angus when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is fine and dandy. Great. Tell me (again?) what the problem

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 04 April 2002 12:32 pm, Angus Leeming wrote: On Tuesday 02 April 2002 4:35 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS Angus when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've just checked that autoconf 2.13 works with my configure script. All is fine and dandy here too. deccxx and deccc are NOT needed at all when using automake = 1.5. Excellent. Angus I forgot to mention: Angus The AC_LANG(C, C++) calls I

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 04 April 2002 1:53 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it is fine as it is. Currently ac2.13 + am 1.5 works with cxx. When we switch to autoconf 2.5x, you will be able to use ac2.53 + am1.6 and all should still work. All we

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus On Thursday 04 April 2002 1:53 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think it is fine as it is. Currently ac2.13 + am 1.5 works with cxx. When we switch to autoconf 2.5x, you will be able to

Re: INSTALL question

On Tuesday 02 April 2002 4:35 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS > Angus> when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is fine and dandy. > > Great. > > >> Tell me

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 04 April 2002 12:32 pm, Angus Leeming wrote: > On Tuesday 02 April 2002 4:35 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Angus> Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS > > Angus> when configuring with

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I've just checked that autoconf 2.13 works with my configure >> script. All is fine and dandy here too. deccxx and deccc are NOT >> needed at all when using automake >= 1.5. Excellent. Angus> I forgot to mention: Angus> The

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 04 April 2002 1:53 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think it is fine as it is. Currently ac2.13 + am 1.5 works with cxx. > When we switch to autoconf 2.5x, you will be able to use ac2.53 + > am1.6 and all should still

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> On Thursday 04 April 2002 1:53 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I think >> it is fine as it is. Currently ac2.13 + am 1.5 works with cxx. When >> we switch to autoconf

Re: INSTALL question

On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] static bool build_name (string,const vectorstring,allocatorvoid ); --^ cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 string is ambiguous etc. Any ideas? I suppose your compiler is seeing a choice of

Re: INSTALL question

On Wednesday 03 April 2002 9:55 am, Allan Rae wrote: On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] static bool build_name (string,const vectorstring,allocatorvoid ); --^ cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 string is ambiguous etc. Any

Re: INSTALL question

On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: On Wednesday 03 April 2002 9:55 am, Allan Rae wrote: ... In particular, why isn't the #define __STRING__ sufficient to stop string being loaded by some other header? Dumb STL implementation? Possibly. It appears that here it's called __STD_STRING.

Re: INSTALL question

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 06:55:20PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: So the question is why? Does `cc -E` provide any insights? In particular, why isn't the #define __STRING__ sufficient to stop string being loaded by some other header? Dumb STL implementation? Why should it? Where is written that

Re: INSTALL question

Allan == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Allan On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] static bool build_name (string,const vectorstring,allocatorvoid ); --^ cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 string is ambiguous etc. Any ideas?

Re: INSTALL question

On Wednesday 03 April 2002 10:19 am, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Allan == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Allan On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] static bool build_name (string,const vectorstring,allocatorvoid ); --^ cxx: Error:

Re: INSTALL question

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:30:39AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: What I don't get is why formala.C is #including locale info anyway. Not to worry, I'm not going to waste much time on this. Everything std:string related carries around locale baggage. I've just removed two unneeded #include's

Re: INSTALL question

On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] > static bool build_name (string&,const vector&); > --^ > cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 "string" is ambiguous > > etc. > > Any ideas? I suppose your compiler is seeing a choice of

Re: INSTALL question

On Wednesday 03 April 2002 9:55 am, Allan Rae wrote: > On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: > [...] > > > static bool build_name (string&,const vector > >&); --^ > > cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 "string" is > > ambiguous > >

Re: INSTALL question

On Wed, 3 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: > On Wednesday 03 April 2002 9:55 am, Allan Rae wrote: ... > > In particular, why isn't the "#define __STRING__" sufficient to stop > > being loaded by some other header? Dumb STL implementation? > > Possibly. It appears that here it's called

Re: INSTALL question

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 06:55:20PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > So the question is why? Does `cc -E` provide any insights? > In particular, why isn't the "#define __STRING__" sufficient to stop > being loaded by some other header? Dumb STL implementation? Why should it? Where is written that

Re: INSTALL question

> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Allan> On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] >> static bool build_name (string&,const vector> >&); --^ cxx: Error: >> /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 "string" is ambiguous >> >>

Re: INSTALL question

On Wednesday 03 April 2002 10:19 am, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Allan> On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Angus Leeming wrote: [...] > > >> static bool build_name (string&,const vector >> > >> >&); --^ cxx:

Re: INSTALL question

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 09:30:39AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > What I don't get is why formala.C is #including locale info anyway. > Not to worry, I'm not going to waste much time on this. Everything std:string related carries around locale baggage. I've just removed two unneeded #include's

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 28 March 2002 2:48 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently Angus straightforward that users should be able to do it with the Angus help of a Readme only. Nonetheless, it's still

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS Angus when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is fine and dandy. Great. Tell me (again?) what the problem was with autoconf 2.13. Angus I'm willing to test autoconf 2.13

Re: INSTALL question

On Tuesday 02 April 2002 4:35 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS Angus when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is fine and dandy. Great. Incidentally, when running

Re: INSTALL question

Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | static bool parse_name (vectorstring,allocatorvoid ,const char*); | -^ | cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 string is ambiguous | static bool build_name (string,const vectorstring,allocatorvoid ); |

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 28 March 2002 2:48 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently > Angus> straightforward that users should be able to do it with the > Angus> help of a Readme only.

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS Angus> when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is fine and dandy. Great. >> Tell me (again?) what the problem was with autoconf 2.13. Angus> I'm willing to test

Re: INSTALL question

On Tuesday 02 April 2002 4:35 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> Jean-Marc, I can confirm that I need neither CPP nor CPPFLAGS > Angus> when configuring with autoconf 2.52. All is fine and dandy. > > Great. Incidentally, when

Re: INSTALL question

Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | static bool parse_name (vector&,const char*); | -^ | cxx: Error: /usr/include/cxx/locimpl, line 309: #266 "string" is ambiguous | static bool build_name (string&,const vector&);

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently Angus straightforward that users should be able to do it with the Angus help of a Readme only. Nonetheless, it's still sufficiently Angus convoluted that this info is probably best placed

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 28 March 2002 2:48 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently Angus straightforward that users should be able to do it with the Angus help of a Readme only. Nonetheless, it's still

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus On Thursday 28 March 2002 2:48 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently Angus straightforward that users should be able to do it with the

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 28 March 2002 3:11 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Why do you need to set CPP? [snip...] as I said, I'll check. Is the problem with std::count still relevant now that we have lyx::count? Angus I believe that we check only for the existence of std::count, Angus not whether

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus I believe that we check only for the existence of std::count, Angus not whether it returns a sane value. Indeed. That's just stupid. Angus It's stupid to check for a sane value? Fair enough; then the Angus comment should stay. No, I was

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently Angus> straightforward that users should be able to do it with the Angus> help of a Readme only. Nonetheless, it's still sufficiently Angus> convoluted that this info is probably

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 28 March 2002 2:48 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently > Angus> straightforward that users should be able to do it with the > Angus> help of a Readme only.

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> On Thursday 28 March 2002 2:48 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Angus> I think that compiling on Tru64 is now sufficiently Angus> straightforward that users should

Re: INSTALL question

On Thursday 28 March 2002 3:11 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >> Why do you need to set CPP? [snip...] as I said, I'll check. > >> Is the problem with std::count still relevant now that we have > >> lyx::count? > > Angus> I believe that we check only for the existence of std::count, >

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> I believe that we check only for the existence of std::count, Angus> not whether it returns a sane value. >> Indeed. That's just stupid. Angus> It's stupid to check for a sane value? Fair enough; then the Angus> comment should

INSTALL question

o On Tru64 Unix with cxx, you may have a compilation error in lyx_main.C if you have GNU gettext installed. This is due to a bug in gettext. To solve this, you can either (1) configure with --with-included-gettext or (2) add -D__STDC__ to cxx flags. Jean-Marc, is there any

Re: INSTALL question

Angus == Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Angus o On Tru64 Unix with cxx, you may have a compilation error in Angus lyx_main.C if you have GNU gettext installed. This is due to a Angus bug in gettext. To solve this, you can either (1) configure Angus with --with-included-gettext or (2)

INSTALL question

o On Tru64 Unix with cxx, you may have a compilation error in lyx_main.C if you have GNU gettext installed. This is due to a bug in gettext. To solve this, you can either (1) configure with --with-included-gettext or (2) add -D__STDC__ to cxx flags. Jean-Marc, is there any

Re: INSTALL question

> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> o On Tru64 Unix with cxx, you may have a compilation error in Angus> lyx_main.C if you have GNU gettext installed. This is due to a Angus> bug in gettext. To solve this, you can either (1) configure Angus> with