[EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:17:04 -0700:
>> From: Julien Michielsen >> Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 5:59:06 AM >> I tried to install pan-0.14.2, but got compilation errors in the make >> process. >> I'm surprised by these errors on a program that's around since June. >> I'm afraid it will be my mistake, but I don't know where to search. >> Any help will be greatly apreciated. > 0.14.2 is more than five years old at this point. I'd strongly recommend > using 0.133 instead. If you're intent on getting 0.14.2 to build, for > whatever reason, send along output from "gcc -v" Older versions of gcc > (such as those in use when 0.14.2 was release) may be more forgiving > than newer versions. Corrected the upside-down posting... Pan gets it right, why can't people in the pan lists groups get it right? <mutter, grumble, mutter> =:^s As stated, pan is WAYYY older than since June. It was already at 0.11, requiring at the time, GNOME (no GNOME 1, since it was just GNOME, the one and only, back then), back when I discovered it in 2001 or so. 0.14.x is old too, at just over five years (August 31, 2003, according to the web site), and with the release of the pan rewrite into C++ with 0.90, the old C code 0.14.x eventually went officially unsupported. Yes, I know it's the last "stable" version, but really, the new 0.133 version is far better and more stable and scalable. The C++ rewrite was made public with 0.90, about 2 and a half years ago now (April 1, 2006, IIRC). For over a year there were nearly weekly betas, until it got to a reasonably functional and stable point, and now it's kind of sitting there. 0.132 was 14 months ago, then it sat for a year exactly, August 1, 2007 to August 1, 2008, when 0.133 was released with a number of patches including a security fix and compatibility patches for gcc 4.3 and glib 2.14(+). So seconding what frobniod said, you'll get much better results with 0.133. If you're looking at taking up the old 0.14.2 code and continuing with a fork of that old pan C code, it may be worth looking at that old and now crufty stuff. Otherwise, probably not. If you do, again as frobnoid said, you'll likely get far better luck with equally ancient gcc, glib, gtk+, etc. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman _______________________________________________ Pan-devel mailing list Pan-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-devel
