Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread John R. Culleton
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 02:41 pm, John R. Culleton wrote: upgraded to > version 32.1 That gave problems with both cvs downloads. > > Now I have upgraded to 33 (which comes with the 2.3.1 gimp > tarball BTW) and now stable will compile and install without > complaint. > > I still have the 2.3.1 t

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread John R. Culleton
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 03:59 pm, Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: > On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:40, John R. Culleton wrote: > > On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:52 am, John R. Culleton wrote: > > > thought it was time to rename the thread since I have gone past > > > the problems with pygtk. > >

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread Carol Spears
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 12:59:31PM -0300, Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris wrote: > On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:40, John R. Culleton wrote: > > On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:52 am, John R. Culleton wrote: > > > thought it was time to rename the thread since I have gone past > > > the problems with pygt

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread Carol Spears
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 04:55:16PM +0100, sam ende wrote: > On Wednesday 29 June 2005 12:40, John R. Culleton wrote: > > > Back to the drawing board. :<( > > poor you :(. i am reading this thread with interest and am thinking of > having a go myself but i am reluctant to do this incase it overwr

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread Joao S. O. Bueno Calligaris
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:40, John R. Culleton wrote: > On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:52 am, John R. Culleton wrote: > > thought it was time to rename the thread since I have gone past > > the problems with pygtk. > > > > If anything else comes up of interest I will report back. > > It seems tha

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread sam ende
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 12:40, John R. Culleton wrote: > Back to the drawing board. :<( poor you :(. i am reading this thread with interest and am thinking of having a go myself but i am reluctant to do this incase it overwrites my current installation. can i install, or try to install the gi

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread John R. Culleton
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 08:52 am, John R. Culleton wrote: > thought it was time to rename the thread since I have gone past > the problems with pygtk. > > If anything else comes up of interest I will report back. It seems that the error reported earlier prevented final compilation so I had unst

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread John R. Culleton
On Wednesday 29 June 2005 01:14 pm, Simon Budig wrote: > John R. Culleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Earlier in my journey autogen.sh had complained about an > > obsolete intltool so I installed version 32 of that package. > > Did you rerun autogen.sh after updating intltool? I removed the cvs

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread Simon Budig
John R. Culleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Earlier in my journey autogen.sh had complained about an > obsolete intltool so I installed version 32 of that package. Did you rerun autogen.sh after updating intltool? > BTW I switched from stable cvs to unstable by deleting the > entire ~/cvs/gimp

Re: Bleeding edge, WAS [Gimp-user] pygtk and 2.3.1

2005-06-29 Thread John R. Culleton
thought it was time to rename the thread since I have gone past the problems with pygtk. I had a successful cvs/compile/install cycle on Gimp stable. Then I thought I would try Gimp unstable, or bleeding edge. I followed the instructions for CVS of Gimp stable with one modification (see below) I