On 12/02/2011 08:20 PM, Andrew Benton wrote: > On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 17:08:52 +0000 > Andrew Benton<[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:33:55 -0600 >> Todd Simpson<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I tried to build gtk+-3.2.2 on my LFS 7.0 system and the configure >>> script failed, with a message that I needed pango-1.29.0 or later. I >>> had pango-1.28.2 because that's what the BLFS book said was needed. >>> >>> I downloaded pango-1.29.4 and it compiled and tested OK, and after >>> installing it, gtk+-3.2.2 could be built. >> Yes, I think you're right. I'll update pango tomorrow > I'm starting to have second thoughts about this. I looked at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pango which says that the current stable > version of Pango is 1.29.5 but then I looked at > http://www.gtk.org/documentation.php and the links there seem to > suggest that pango-1.29 is unstable and pango-1.28 is the stable > series. Personally I've been using pango-1.29.3 for months and I'm not > aware of any bus in it, but then I'm English and Pango is for laying > out international text. > > So what do people think, is it Ok to put pango-1.29 in the book? > gtk+-3.2 requires pango-1.29. gtk+-3.2.2 is the current stable version > of gtk+-3. It's a contradiction. Advice please. > > Andy Not much choice here. If it is required then it is required. I would wonder if pango-1.30 is on the horizon though. As a quick gauge, what was the pango requirement of 3.2.1?
-- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
