On 2007-11-05 16:57-0600 Geoffrey Furnish wrote:
> But now, make install fails:
>
> Install the project...
> -- Install configuration: ""
> CMake Error: Error in cmake code at
> .../plplot/tmp2/cmake_install.cmake:35:
> FILE cannot create directory: /share/doc/plplot. Maybe need administrative
>
Alan W. Irwin writes:
> >From later e-mail you appear to have solved this by dropping linking of
> python libraries, but that may just hide the problem until later when
> you actually try and execute the code.
Possibly. I haven't gotten as far as testing it yet. But, btw, if you study
how the
Geoffrey Furnish writes:
> But now, make install fails:
>
> Install the project...
> -- Install configuration: ""
> CMake Error: Error in cmake code at
> .../plplot/tmp2/cmake_install.cmake:35:
> FILE cannot create directory: /share/doc/plplot. Maybe need administrative
> privi
> leges.
On 2007-11-05 15:22-0600 Geoffrey Furnish wrote:
> Be that as it may, I have a new and more serious problem. When I try to
> build plplot after running cmake as explained in my first post, the build
> fails while trying to build the python binding.
>
> [ 26%] Building C object
> bindings/python/
Hello,
Since you seem to be interested in a pretty old version of PLplot, I
would suggest trying to find a suitable RPM.
I've posted your message to the PLplot mailing list in the hopes that
someone there will be better able to guide you.
best,
-Hazen
On Nov 5, 2007, at 8:19 AM, rupak r
Geoffrey Furnish writes:
> So, question: Can anyone help me understnad how
> bindings/python/CMakeFiles/_plplotcmodule.dir/relink.txt is generated, and
> suggest how I might fix it's generation to not name the unnecessary and
> trouble-causing "-lpython2.5"?
I got as far as:
% svn diff bindin
Alan W. Irwin writes:
> Geoffrey asked:
>
> "So I guess the
> question is, how can I make "find_package(PythonInterp)" find the python
> that's in the prefix, instead of the one that's in the path?"
>
> Try changing PATH so the "special" python is what you get when you execute
> the "pyth
Alan W. Irwin wrote:
> On 2007-11-02 19:40-0400 Hazen Babcock wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> What is the current thinking on the 5.8.0 final release? Are there
>> still Cygwin issues that need to be sorted out or are we ready?
>
>>From what I have read, I believe we are ready (at least as good as befor
