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)

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
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/gimp

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

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

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 overwrites my

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 pygtk.

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. If

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 tarball