Marc Lehmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 04:54:39PM +0100, Simon Budig 
> > checkout of the gimp. Gimp-perl compiled and - after doing a separate
> > make install as root in plug-ins/perl it worked.
> > (BTW: Why is gimpdoc installed in /usr and not in my PREFIX?)
> See README.perl. It's where you told perl to install extensions.

Hmm - IMHO at least for these additional files (not the module itself)
the option specified at the top level ./configure should be inherited.
>From README.perl I learn that I have only the chance to set one prefix.
Wouldnt this install the Gimp-Perl module in /unstable (in my case)
and perl would not find the module?

BTW: The Perl installation happily installs the man-pages to
/usr/local/man/man?   while the scripts gimpdoc and xcftoppm
reside in /usr/bin. This is inconsistent.

> > However, in the desire to keep up to date  :-)  I did an cvs update
> > and typed make in the top level source dir.
> > Makefile out-of-date with respect to Makefile.PL
> > Cleaning current config before rebuilding Makefile...
> > make -f Makefile.old clean > /dev/null 2>&1 || /bin/sh -c true
> this shouldn't happen. what were the exact commands you entered before the
> make?

I did definitely not mess around in the plug-ins/perl directory.
IIRC it was like this:

(17. Nov.)
cvs co gimp
./autogen --prefix=/unstable
make install

perl was OK at this time.

(today after major changes in app/)
cvs update

> > configure: warning: ** unable to find gimp
> > ./configure: no: command not found
> > ./configure: no: command not found
> > ./configure: test: -lt: unary operator expected
> now *that* is strange ;)

As I said: gimp-config and gimptool are not in my PATH...

> > What is happening here? Why does the second build suddenly depend on an
> It tries to build as a standalone perl extension (so it tries to find the
> gimp). This should not happen as the top-level configure script tells it
> not to do so.

I am not sure, if the make re-invoked the top-level configure script.

> Did you configure the gimp tree without perl? What did you do to enable
> gimp?  Did you do make distclean and re-run

As I wrote before this was the second build counting from a fresh CVS
Checkout. Normally the make re-invokes the script when it
is necessary.

> > Marc - could you please fix this behaviour so that people with zero
> > knowledge about the Gimp-Perl build process could conveniently build
> It works for other people, actually, without any knowledge. The problems
> only start when people replace Makefiles in the perl directory, usually ;)

Ok, but this time I did not yet mess with the Makefile...


Reply via email to