Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 12:37:01PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Support wrote:
Ah, thanks Bruce for your time, effort and the excellent detail !
I'll try to look over the config and see if I can find where that gets
called
so maybe I can learn to do that myself ;)
This is my first time here and I have to say you "guys" are awesome.
You not only provide detailed and targeted timely responses but give
the detail so that one can learn from the experience.
P.S. Might a note in the book regarding this warning be helpful or
maybe something else?
Please do not top post on this list.
There is a bullet point in "General Compilation Instructions":
"During the compilation of most packages, there will be several warnings
that scroll by on the screen. These are normal and can safely be ignored.
These warnings are as they appear—warnings about deprecated, but not
invalid, use of the C or C++ syntax. C standards change fairly often, and
some packages still use the older standard. This is not a problem, but does
prompt the warning."
That goes for configure too.
-- Bruce
Bruce - in this case I have to disagree.
In the first place, if you run configure without '&& make', which is
what we do in LFS, the (second instance of the) message does *not*
scroll by - it is the last thing you see at the end of running
configure.
The more important reason is that where a configure script reports an
unexpected switch (not all of them do), in every other case I have
seen the message is correct and the user probably mistyped the
command.
In this case, I think we ought to add something like:
The meaning of the configure options:
--disable-static
In this case, the top-level configure script will complain, but
the configure script for XSParagraph recognizes it and uses it
to disapble installing a static XSParagraph.a to
/usr/lib/texinfo.
OK. Do you want ot make the change?
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
