On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 09:00 -0500, Josh Sled wrote: > On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:36 -0800, Karl Hegbloom wrote: > > I won't have time to try and fix these; I'm way behind on my Mathematics > > homework and should really be working on that instead... > > > > Hope this helps. Do yous have an AMD64 to test compile on? > > Only vicariously through souls like yourself... :) > > ...but the issue here isn't x86_64 specific: the GSF_CLASS_FULL macro > errors in the lib/goffice/ code are due to a macro signature difference > in <=libgsf-1.12.1 and >=libgsf-1.12.2. > > Neil Williams had put in a check re: libgoffice / libgsf to work around > this on his Debian Unstable box. What system-installed versions of > libgsf and libgoffice do you have?
libgsf-1-dev 1.12.3-3ubuntu3 libgsf-gnome-1-dev 1.12.3-3ubuntu3 libgoffice-1-dev was not installed at all. I just installed version 0.0.4-1, also from Ubuntu. I don't know how it was able to finish 'configure' and compile as much as it did if it requires libgoffice. Perhaps a 'configure.in' check for that is not present? It probably would fail to link without it. -- Karl Hegbloom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel