. At least if anyone else is
getting this kind of error, if they check that the XDG path is set it
should solve the problem.
I have no idea why this solved it, if gcr is not even making a call to it,
but it HAS solved it, for which I am very happy.
Regards,
Christopher
--
http
the compile
from an xterm terminal.
These are only set from the kde.sh script.
perhaps adding those instructions to the page may help others from getting
the same result that I did initially, which was unable to find gio and
gobject 2.0 in vala search path.
It was rather misleading, as it was neither
m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote:
Hello,
While I was attempting to compile Gcr-3.10.1 from the stable BLFS-7.5 book
I was not able to do so until I did the following:
XDG_DATA_HOME=/usr/share
export XDG_DATA_HOME
XDG_DATA_DIRS=/usr/share/
export XDG_DATA_DIRS
I do not yet have KDE
Cliff McDiarmid wrote:
Hello
I wonder if someone can shed some light on this problem which has
developed?
I'm running a recent build of LFS(7.3)with kde 4.10.
I made some minor PATH changes in /etc/.profile and ~.bashrc which I
have now deleted. But I'm left with a problem under user
Cliff McDiarmid wrote:
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dubbs Sent: 10/21/13 08:14
PM To: BLFS Support List Subject: Re: [blfs-support] PATH problem?
Cliff McDiarmid wrote:
Hello
I wonder if someone can shed some light on this problem which
has developed?
I'm running a recent
Greetings
I am trying to install evince-3.8.3.
I have gtk3 at /opt/gtk
and a file such as /opt/gtk/share/gir-1.0/Gdk-3.0.gir for exmaple
compiling evince-3.8.3 spews a line with :-
could not find Gdk-3.0.gir search path [/usr/share/gir-1.0,
/usr/share/gir-1.0, /usr/share/gir-1.0, /usr
lux-integ wrote:
Greetings
I am trying to install evince-3.8.3.
I have gtk3 at /opt/gtk
and a file such as /opt/gtk/share/gir-1.0/Gdk-3.0.gir for exmaple
compiling evince-3.8.3 spews a line with :-
could not find Gdk-3.0.gir search path [/usr/share/gir-1.0,
/usr/share/gir-1.0, /usr
On Friday 23 August 2013 13:15:31 Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I don't know, but try creating symlinks in /usr/share/gir-1.0 to the
files in /opt/gtk/share/gir-1.0
works thanks
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe:
On 01/06/2013 08:51 AM, Simon Geard wrote:
A curious question, for anyone who might know.
Why, in the LLVM instructions, do we go to such lengths to put all the
libraries in a subdirectory of /usr/lib, only to add an entry to
ld.so.conf to ensure everything can find them?
I ask because I
of functionality. Icons
were missing, lot of env vars were needed to be set (and I hate setting
them), namely python modules path, xdg env vars (don't know the right
name), PATH, man path, info path and such ...
With all of these, it still wasn't working. I can recommend looking at
jhbuild or ostree
On 12/04/2012 05:15 AM, Michael Robinson wrote:
How do I adjust the path? I'm trying to install gnome specific
packages to /usr/gnome, because I'm low on space and because I
was hoping to be able to jerk gnome out easily if I need to.
Please note that you will be on your own there. Last
On 12/04/12 14:40, Armin K. wrote:
On 12/04/2012 05:15 AM, Michael Robinson wrote:
How do I adjust the path? I'm trying to install gnome specific
packages to /usr/gnome, because I'm low on space and because I
was hoping to be able to jerk gnome out easily if I need to.
Please note that you
How do I adjust the path? I'm trying to install gnome specific
packages to /usr/gnome, because I'm low on space and because I
was hoping to be able to jerk gnome out easily if I need to.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs
On 12/03/2012 11:15 PM, Michael Robinson wrote:
How do I adjust the path? I'm trying to install gnome specific
packages to /usr/gnome, because I'm low on space and because I
was hoping to be able to jerk gnome out easily if I need to.
See the BLFS page that describes what to do when
archive
How can I adjust the path?
Thanks for your help.
Tester He
What version of LFS? If recent, did you remove the installed glib and
pkgconfig file in /usr?
-- DJ Lucas
LFS 6.7
Yes I did remove the previous glib and pkgconfig files, thanks.
Tester He
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org
archive
How can I adjust the path?
Thanks for your help.
Tester He
What version of LFS? If recent, did you remove the installed glib and
pkgconfig file in /usr?
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 00:49 +0800, ?? wrote:
Excuse me. I am trying to build Gnome 3 in /opt/gnome. I've added
/opt/gnome/usr/lib/pkgconfig to PKG_CONFIG_PATH and /opt/gnome/usr/lib
to ld.so.conf.
why it is /opt/gnome/usr/lib ? Shouldn't it be /opt/gnome/lib instead ?
What arguments are you
On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 00:49 +0800, 高飛 wrote:
Excuse me. I am trying to build Gnome 3 in /opt/gnome. I've added
/opt/gnome/usr/lib/pkgconfig to PKG_CONFIG_PATH and /opt/gnome/usr/lib
to ld.so.conf.
why it is /opt/gnome/usr/lib ? Shouldn't it be /opt/gnome/lib instead ?
What arguments are you
Continuing my gnome saga, I fired it up for the first time yesterday.
Here are two consecutive entries into my project log:
jamzen: 11:44 AM Sun, 14 Nov 2010
hamilton:/build/gn/gnome-user-docs-2.30.1
tags: gnome first run
[1] The desktop comes up ok, but there's no text -- only an empty box
for
Jim Michmerhuizen wrote these words on 11/15/10 09:59 CST:
The error appears in the fourth graybox on the Xorg Fonts page in
svn-20101016, and it's still there in svn-20101112:
ln -svn $XORG_PREFIX/share/fonts/X11/fonts/OTF /usr/share/fonts/X11-OTF
ln -svn
On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 20:28 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
If no mistakes on my part on this subject,
this will cause errors for some packages
looking in the wrong place.
Is this a trend?
It's not a mistake on your part - it just seems to be that a small
number of packages install their
On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 00:56 -0500, Chris Staub wrote:
First, it doesn't matter what order, unless there are duplicate files in
both directories. Second, as noted in the manpage, /usr/lib/pkgconfig
and /usr/share/pkgconfig are both searched by default anyway so they
don't need to be in
On 16/12/09 02:28, al...@verizon.net wrote:
Hello,
In the process of building Xorg-7.5 (from 7.4)
I stumbled upon something odd.
For a couple of packages their 'pc' files ended up
in '/usr/share/pkgconfig' instead of the tried and true
'/usr/lib/pkgconfig'.
If no mistakes on my part on
(i.e. prepending the new path /usr/share/pkgconfig but implicitly
using the pkg-config manual default, /usr/lib/pkgconfig).
NO error, meaning that the default is brought into play sometime
(who knows when), AFTER the first component, /usr/share/pkgconfig/,
is searched! Who would've thunk
On 16/12/09 20:00, al...@verizon.net wrote:
Andrew Benton wrote on Wed Dec 16 05:25:26 MST 2009
Why? Can you give examples of these errors?
Yes [the trigger for my opening post].
Failure of 'xorg-server-1.7.1' (Xorg-7.5) on configure:
checking for XSERVERCFLAGS... configure: error:
On Wed, 2009-12-16 at 14:00 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
The Udev developers, in their relentless quest for perfection
decided to join the crowd with their own pc file in 149.
Interesting... I'd not noticed that one (it's present as early as 146,
btw). Going by the contents of /lib/udev, I
Hello,
In the process of building Xorg-7.5 (from 7.4)
I stumbled upon something odd.
For a couple of packages their 'pc' files ended up
in '/usr/share/pkgconfig' instead of the tried and true
'/usr/lib/pkgconfig'.
Specifically, in '/usr/share/pkgconfig' I now have:
udev-149 (independently, of
On 12/15/2009 09:28 PM, al...@verizon.net wrote:
Hello,
In the process of building Xorg-7.5 (from 7.4)
I stumbled upon something odd.
For a couple of packages their 'pc' files ended up
in '/usr/share/pkgconfig' instead of the tried and true
'/usr/lib/pkgconfig'.
Specifically, in
David Kuntadi wrote:
No. I am suggesting a chapter in BLFS to create complete desktop
environement without x.
David
BLFS already has plenty of packages listed that don't need X. The main
problem is that different users have different definitions of complete
desktop environment. It's up
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Chris Staub [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BLFS already has plenty of packages listed that don't need X. The main
problem is that different users have different definitions of complete
desktop environment. It's up to the users to pick and choose what they
want -
Recently I have managed to run links -g (graphical links) and I just
allow read and write for all for /dev folder to all as work around.
But when I tried INX, definitely it is a huge task for me to make
similar setup on top of lfs:
http://inx.maincontent.net/announce-inx-1.0.html
I think blfs
Below is the list of packages to build INX. It looks like not so huge after all:
http://inx.maincontent.net/1.0-versions-package-list
abcde 2.3.99.6-1ubuntu2
antiword 0.37-2
bsdmainutils
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 03:04:54PM +0700, David Kuntadi wrote:
Below is the list of packages to build INX. It looks like not so huge after
all:
http://inx.maincontent.net/1.0-versions-package-list
I have no interest in this, but it looks like the sort of thing that
might have fitted into
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 05:12:57PM +, Ken Moffat wrote:
I have no interest in this, but it looks like the sort of thing that
might have fitted into a hint, so perhaps you could put it in the
wiki (dunno, maybe packages not in BLFS don't fit there).
Among other things, to get into the
David Kuntadi wrote:
Recently I have managed to run links -g (graphical links) and I just
allow read and write for all for /dev folder to all as work around.
Um, workaround for what?
But when I tried INX, definitely it is a huge task for me to make
similar setup on top of lfs:
Below is my response to both Ken and Chris.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Ken Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Among other things, to get into the book you need to engage an
editor's interest. I find it hard to see why anyone would use a
desktop without X nowadays.
That is what I differ.
David Kuntadi wrote:
Below is my response to both Ken and Chris.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Chris Staub [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Kuntadi wrote:
Um, workaround for what?
links -g do not have write access to /dev/fb0, and requires to run as root.
BLFS is just a guide for
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Chris Staub [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe I'm just clueless, but can you explain specifically what it is you
are proposing, and how this is any different from, say, building a
standard LFS system and a few select packages from BLFS?
I am suggesting a complete
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Chris Staub [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, you're suggesting a new livecd, based on LFS, without X?
No. I am suggesting a chapter in BLFS to create complete desktop
environement without x.
David
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ:
David Kuntadi wrote:
If we
could have desktop without x, that would be marvellous. We could have
very fast desktop that could run on very old hardware, and even faster
on new hardware.
Hmm. Browser based management tools from server console is nice use of
fb, but double clicking links
Using-blfs-book-cvs-html-2006-10-12
After installing, linux-PAM-0.99.4.0 then re-installing Shadow-4.0.15
and following the book's configuration scripts. when I su to root,
root's PATH= /bin:/usr/bin.
When I login as root the PATH looks right; /usr/local/sbin:/usr/
local/bin:/bin:/usr
Alle 17:44, mercoledì 18 ottobre 2006, Arden ha scritto:
Using-blfs-book-cvs-html-2006-10-12
After installing, linux-PAM-0.99.4.0 then re-installing Shadow-4.0.15
and following the book's configuration scripts. when I su to root,
root's PATH= /bin:/usr/bin.
When I login as root the PATH
On 10/18/06, Arden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
also in the /etc/bashrc configuration there is this on the 7th line;
if [ -f /etc/profile.d/tinker-term.sh ]; then
source /etc/profile.d/tinker-term.sh
fi
the book doesn't have any tinker-term.sh script.
Whoops! Nice catch. I removed the script
Alessandro Alocci napisał(a):
Alle 17:44, mercoledì 18 ottobre 2006, Arden ha scritto:
Using-blfs-book-cvs-html-2006-10-12
After installing, linux-PAM-0.99.4.0 then re-installing Shadow-4.0.15
and following the book's configuration scripts. when I su to root,
root's PATH= /bin:/usr/bin.
When
I'm looking to upgrade to xorg-7 from xorg-6. I know this will be a
challenge, but we have to find some sort of solution.
Any pointers as to how to proceed?
--
Esben Stien is [EMAIL PROTECTED] s a
http://www. s tn m
irc://irc. b - i .
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 23:13 +0200, Esben Stien wrote:
I'm looking to upgrade to xorg-7 from xorg-6. I know this will be a
challenge, but we have to find some sort of solution.
Any pointers as to how to proceed?
The SVN book was pretty straightforward and easy enough to follow. I
made some
On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 09:24 -0600, Peter B. Steiger wrote:
On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 22:45 +1200, Simon Geard wrote:
Out of curiosity, do you have similar problems with the various
calendaring functions?
Absolutely - Any attempt to go into the calendar functions locks up all
of Evolution,
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 09:02 -0600, Peter B. Steiger wrote:
Now all the icons appear correctly, but yet again my contacts list is
gone! I cleaned out my test user's entire /home directory so there
would not be any previous config files in place, started up again so
Gnome could build whatever
On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 22:45 +1200, Simon Geard wrote:
Out of curiosity, do you have similar problems with the various
calendaring functions?
Absolutely - Any attempt to go into the calendar functions locks up all
of Evolution, and I had to go to console and kill the process to regain
control
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 14:00 -0600, Peter B. Steiger wrote:
To make a long story short (too late!) what I finally realized after
blowing the weekend on this project was that for whatever reason,
Evolution (and possibly the Gnome panel) doesn't like having libexec
processes in the /bin folder.
a couple of weeks ago I got everything working with 2.12 except
the Evolution icons that seem to come and go at random, and when someone
mentioned a possible problem with my path I thought I'd take a closer
look at the paths I use.
Now, unlike the instructions in the book I don't type a full ./configure
Peter B. Steiger wrote:
Why did you (blfs authors) write the Gnome
section so as to put the libexec functions in a separate directory
(e.g., /usr/gnome/lib/gnome-applets, /usr/gnome/lib/bonobo, etc.) rather
than just one big /usr/gnome/lib/libexec?
There was a discussion about it and the
/libexec by default. That's not
in anyone's path. Where you decide to dump things is up to you, but
you should probably keep it out of your PATH unless you know there's a
binary you'll really need and can use.
I like $prefix/lib/$packagename because it keeps things nice and clean
and modular-ish
On Mon, 2006-06-05 at 22:44 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
There was a discussion about it and the decision was to put libexec
files for PACKAGE in /usr/lib/$PACKAGE
http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-dev/2005-October/011808.html
Domo arrigato! Glad to know I wasn't the only one
Alberto Hernando wrote:
Hi.
I have my LFS system and I've started installing some packages. At some point
I must have made a mistake, because when I run ldconfig, it searches
ld.so.conf in a wrong path that starts with /mnt/lfs. I guess I should
recompile ldconfig again, but I can't find
On 2/8/06, Alberto Hernando [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi.
I have my LFS system and I've started installing some packages. At some point
I must have made a mistake, because when I run ldconfig, it searches
ld.so.conf in a wrong path that starts with /mnt/lfs. I guess I should
recompile
El Miércoles, 8 de Febrero de 2006 14:55, Chris Staub escribió:
Run ldd on several programs, and paste the output here.
Here it is. I got it chrooting to the LFS:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:Sarge:~# ldd /usr/X11R6/bin/xedit
linux-gate.so.1 = (0xe000)
libXp.so.6 =
: No such
file or directory
ldconfig: Can't create temporary cache file /mnt/lfs/usr/etc/ld.so.cache~: No
such file or directory
Making /mnt/lfs an appropiate symbolik link seems to solve the problem, but
no. Configuring cairo:
configure: WARNING: Could not find libpng in the pkg-config search path
Alberto Hernando wrote:
El Miércoles, 8 de Febrero de 2006 14:58, Robert Russell escribió:
Is ldconfig looking for ld.so.conf in /mnt/lfs/* or does ld.so.conf
have an entry starting with /mnt/lfs in it?
This:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:Sarge:~# ldconfig
ldconfig: Can't open configuration file
El Miércoles, 8 de Febrero de 2006 15:21, Chris Staub escribió:
Then that probably means binutils is linked to the wrong libs. Run ldd
on /usr/bin/ld.
Here it is:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:Sarge:~# ldd /usr/bin/ld
linux-gate.so.1 = (0xe000)
libbfd-2.15.94.0.2.2.so =
think that the default path is in /mnt/lfs, then you may have
some big issues.
I don't think recompiling binutils will have any effect on your
situation. In fact, if you were able to build all of LFS, then surely
you can link at build time (binutils). You can try to rebuild glibc,
but be careful
El Miércoles, 8 de Febrero de 2006 15:53, Dan Nicholson escribió:
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but if ldconfig is reporting that
it's looking in /mnt/lfs, then glibc is your problem. And if parts of
glibc think that the default path is in /mnt/lfs, then you may have
some big issues
62 matches
Mail list logo
