On Tuesday 28 June 2005 04:01 pm, Manish Singh wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 10:46:12AM +0000, John R. Culleton wrote:
> > On Tuesday 28 June 2005 10:13 am, John R. Culleton wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 14 June 2005 08:42 pm, Carol Spears wrote:
> > > > mr. culleton, i am going to respectfully ask the reason that after
> > > > all of this time you are not running a cvs version of gimp? you seem
> > > > overdue for this.
> > >
> > > With other packages there is an overnight snapshot of the CVS,
> > > bundled as tarball. Does such a facility exist for Gimp? Where?
> > >
> > > > if you find pygtk and get python running on gimp, i would like to
> > > > have your feedback about my silly little script writing attempts.
> > >
> > > Still struggling with pygtk. More later.
> > Happy to report that they pygtk problem has bee ameliorated. I
> > found pygtk-2.0 and installed it. Then after a little cut-and
> > try I copied pygtk-2.0.pc to /usr/lib/pkgconfig. That bypassed
> > the error messages.
> > Why the pygtk make install didn't do this automatically I don't
> > know.
> Because you're supposed to set PKG_CONFIG_PATH in the environment to
> point to where the .pc file lives, instead of copying it.
Fine. so if I have 148 packages, then this environment variable
is set to all 148 locations? Two facts intrude:
1. 148 other files with the suffix .pc reside in the directory
2. The environmental variable you mention doesn't appear to exist
on my machine currently. I used the "set" command with no
parameters and it did not show up on the list.
Sorry folks, I am an old line pragmatist. The quickest and surest
way to make something work is the one I will choose. Instead of
expanding the list of locations searched just for a single
package used by a single application, moving the required file
to a place where the system will find it makes more sense to me.
It is simple, it is sensible and it is robust.
Books with answers to marketing and publishing questions:
Book coaches, consultants and packagers:
Gimp-user mailing list