From: Tara Milana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sometimes packages aren't always an option for everyone. If
you package something then you require whoever uses it to
get/update everything it depends on. Where as source is more
convient without having to do that.
You only have to update the
On 2003.10.16 00:33 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You only have to update the dependencies if you have to update the
dependencies. If a new GTK+ version requires updated dependencies then
you'll have the same problem when building from source, except it will be
more difficult.
Hi,
What if, for
From: Tara Milana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What if, for example, if a packaged GTK+ 2 was compiled for,
say, a glibc 2.2 system and someone with a glibc 2.0 system
could still run GTK+ 2 if it were compiled for glibc 2.0 but
the packaged GTK+ 2 was not compiled for glibc 2.0. In this
Hi,
I am using a scrolledwindow and want to know how to
automatically make the scrollbars especially the
vertical, position itself such that the last widget
set active or which is currently grabbing the focus is
always visible at the bottom of the scrolled window.
Or in case of text widgets, the
At Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 09:26:46AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote:
At Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:47:12PM -0600, Michael Torrie wrote:
All the compilation problems I've seen lately on this list stem from
users not understanding what happens when you install to /usr/local and
try to use pkg-config
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
busmanus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When I am trying to configure the source code of gtk+-2.2.0,
Is there a special reason you are compiling gtk+-2.2.0 instead of the
newer gtk+-2.2.4? You should always use the latest released versions
in the stable series
Hi,
Chad A Daelhousen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh, I misunderstood the problem. /usr/bin/pkg-config is _still there_,
oblivious to /usr/local/*, and run by default because it's earlier in
$PATH.
In that case, is there any situation in which /usr/bin/pkg-config should
NOT look in
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 03:03, Tara Milana wrote:
On 2003.10.16 00:33 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You only have to update the dependencies if you have to update the
dependencies. If a new GTK+ version requires updated dependencies then
you'll have the same problem when building from source,
Hi,
busmanus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The download page still shows version 2.2.0 as the latest stable
version, at least that's what I made out of it.
What page is that? http://gtk.org/download/ says 2.2 is the latest
version and it links to ftp://ftp.gtk.org/pub/gtk/v2.2/. At the
beginning
Hello,
I am having some errors that I have no idea what they are. I have pango 1.2.5,
glib-2.2.3, atk-1.2.4 installed. Those installed without a hitch. Now when I try to
`make` gtk+ I get the error:
-
gcc -shared
busmanus wrote:
When I am trying to configure the source code of gtk+-2.2.0,
I get the following error:
checking X11/extensions/XShm.h... yes
checking Pango flags... -I/usr/local/include/pango-1.0
-I/usr/include/freetype2
-I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/local/include/glib-2.0
Hi Guys,
I have copied the output of the ./configure i run got GTK+1.2.8. Let me know if you
can help me trace the error here. Thx a lot.
I get this error although GLIB installs fine
bash-2.03$ ./configure
loading cache ./config.cache
checking for a BSD compatible install... ./install-sh -c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In this case, I am not convinced that enough research has been done to fix
the original performance problem. People don't seem to have this problem
with GTK+, and Daniel didn't seem to have this problem with gtkmm in
regexxer. If someone can show that it's a gtkmm-specific
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
busmanus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I did take a look, but it wasn't written in a language I
understand. I cannot quote it in now, but when I do, I'd like to
know, if I can send the whole file, or I'll have to try to find the
sections in it that may be of
On 2003.10.16 01:43 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Tara Milana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What if, for example, if a packaged GTK+ 2 was compiled for,
say, a glibc 2.2 system and someone with a glibc 2.0 system
could still run GTK+ 2 if it were compiled for glibc 2.0 but
the packaged
On 2003.10.16 08:21 Michael L Torrie wrote:
What if, for example, if a packaged GTK+ 2 was compiled for,
say, a glibc 2.2 system and someone with a glibc 2.0 system could
still run GTK+ 2 if it were compiled for glibc 2.0 but the
packaged GTK+ 2 was not compiled for glibc 2.0. In this
Dear Chris, I get that error too, I tried to link them manually
by calling ld and putting every .o in the argument but when I
go on to compile GDK it has problems finding the .la script
for gdk-pixbuf.
--Tara
On 2003.10.16 18:26 Chris wrote:
/usr/bin/ld:.libs/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.ver:1: parse
Hi,
busmanus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I definitely won't, when I asked this question, I didn't realize it was
43 kB. Anyway, I had another look at the config.log and it makes some
more sense now, but I'll need some help all the same. Here's what seems
like the key to the problem:
Hi
Sven Neumann wrote:
Looks like for whatever reason libexpat (used by fontconfig) is not
found in your library search path.
What does that mean? Fontconfig must have found it during compilation,
because the reason I installed expat was fontconfig refusing to compile
without it. It's in
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 11:13, Chad A Daelhousen wrote:
In that case, is there any situation in which /usr/bin/pkg-config should
NOT look in /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig? Havoc, as maintainer, what are
your thoughts? Should this be changed?
/usr/local/lib isn't in /etc/ld.so.conf either (pkgconfig
20 matches
Mail list logo
