[Flightgear-devel] Problems with 1.99.5
Anyone else having issues building this? I'm getting: config.status: error: cannot find input file: utils/propmerge/Makefile.in When trying to build a clean extract of the source tarball. Jon - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems with 1.99.5
I think this is fixed now in cvs, but nothing will happen until a new tarball is generated (using make dist) Regards, Curt. On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 6:44 AM, Jon Stockill wrote: Anyone else having issues building this? I'm getting: config.status: error: cannot find input file: utils/propmerge/Makefile.in When trying to build a clean extract of the source tarball. Jon - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems with 1.99.5
Curtis Olson wrote: I think this is fixed now in cvs, but nothing will happen until a new tarball is generated (using make dist) I haven't seen any problems with CVS recently, but I was just updating my build script ready for a release and so was running it against the RC tarballs. Just out of interest which version of OSG are people planning to link the release against? Are we going to wait for a 2.8 release, or go with one of the 2.7 developer releases? Jon - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems with 1.99.5
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 9:31 AM, Jon Stockill wrote: Curtis Olson wrote: I think this is fixed now in cvs, but nothing will happen until a new tarball is generated (using make dist) I haven't seen any problems with CVS recently, but I was just updating my build script ready for a release and so was running it against the RC tarballs. There can be subtle differences between what you get on a cvs checkout or update versus what you get from make dist and the resulting tarball. make dist only knows about what is referenced in the Makefile.am's ... so it's possible to add a .h file (for instance) to cvs or a new directory without providing the proper references in in the Makefile.am files and the files will be there in cvs, but not in make dist ... it seems like I often catch a couple of these for each new release. I'm not horrified though since there are a lot of subtleties in the automake/autoconf system that I wouldn't expect every developer to fully understand. Just out of interest which version of OSG are people planning to link the release against? Are we going to wait for a 2.8 release, or go with one of the 2.7 developer releases? I have a problem building a dependency against some development version of a library which is only available from cvs (note the mess that openal can often be on many platforms) OSG is a little bit better in that there is a real tarball with a real version we can download and build against ... even if it's not an official stable release. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/ - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems with 1.99.5
On Wednesday, 03. December 2008, Jon Stockill wrote: Just out of interest which version of OSG are people planning to link the release against? Are we going to wait for a 2.8 release, or go with one of the 2.7 developer releases? Looking at previous OSG release dates (2.2 October, 2.4 April, 2.6 August) the next release cannot be that far away, so it might make sense to wait. And maybe they would consider releasing soon if nicely asked? Stefan - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Problems with 1.99.5
Curtis Olson wrote: I have a problem building a dependency against some development version of a library which is only available from cvs (note the mess that openal can often be on many platforms) OSG is a little bit better in that there is a real tarball with a real version we can download and build against ... even if it's not an official stable release. That's why I suggested the developer release rather than cvs/svn/whatever else they may use. I think there *are* now issues with building against a 2.6.x release. Jon - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
