Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Perhaps X is not fully installed. On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Anne Wall wrote: /usr/include/Xm/Xm.h:42:34: X11/extensions/Print.h: No such file or directory -- .
RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Do you mean X Windows? Motif? We're running X Windows, and
it seems like it has no problems. How would I tell if that's the
problem? Do I need to reinstall X Windows to get vim to compile?
{shudder}
-Original Message-
From: Vigil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:04 AM
To: Vim Mailing List
Subject: Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Perhaps X is not fully installed.
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Anne Wall wrote:
/usr/include/Xm/Xm.h:42:34: X11/extensions/Print.h: No such file or
directory
--
.
RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
I guess I don't really have to recompile it; I just couldn't find any more
recent binary than 6.3 for my platform, and I thought, as long as I'm trying
to get it to run, I should do the best install I could. We already have a
binary of 6.1, and one of our users complains that he has some problems with
it.
Maybe his problems are actually related to the possibly incomplete X
install.
I could compile the non-GUI version, but if the user is already addicted to
the
GUI, that's going backwards.
I'm just hesitant to make changes to anything that could affect my coworkers
adversely.
I guess I'll try compiling the non-GUI. I've poked around in the Makefile; I
guess
I was just hoping someone else had seen the same problem before.
-Original Message-
From: Smith Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:32 AM
To: Anne Wall
Subject: RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
A quick scan for Xm.h reveals that it is a Motif header file; you would
need to install any required Motif header files (i.e., the associated
development package), or alternatively compile the non GUI version (via the
appropriate switch). This is Compiling 101 type stuff, and you should
probably consult a compilation from sources tutorial before you continue.
Why do you need to recompile Vim? Why not just use the appropriate
binaries?
On Redhat:
yum -y install vim
Provided of course yum has been set up :)
--Eric
BTW, Google is your friend: google Xm.h.
-Original Message-
From: Anne Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 October 2006 04:14 PM
To: Vim Mailing List
Subject: RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Do you mean X Windows? Motif? We're running X Windows, and it seems like it
has no problems. How would I tell if that's the problem? Do I need to
reinstall X Windows to get vim to compile?
{shudder}
-Original Message-
From: Vigil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:04 AM
To: Vim Mailing List
Subject: Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Perhaps X is not fully installed.
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Anne Wall wrote:
/usr/include/Xm/Xm.h:42:34: X11/extensions/Print.h: No such file or
directory
--
.
Confidentiality Warning
*==*
The contents of this e-mail and any accompanying documentation are
confidential and any use thereof, in what ever form, by anyone other than
the addressee is strictly prohibited.
Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Anne Wall wrote:
I couldn't find any more recent binaries than 6.3, but I did find
the RPMs for that, so I installed it, and the populace is happy
and peaceful.
Thanks for your help! I'm grateful for your kind advice. I was
under some wrong impressions, especially thinking it's important
to compile the source yourself.
I tried redirecting my Motif directories to the correct ones, as it
mentioned in the Makefile, but that didn't help. WELL, I take it back.
It did properly find Print.h, so that was an improvement. It had errors,
though, so not fixed. I did try to compile after diabling the GUI, but
I still had the same problems.
Then I finally wised up and gave up, went looking for binaries, and
looked away, whistling, as I left the directory full of lovely vim
source code to slowly gather dust and cd'd back to home.
It does make sense to compile Vim yourself, because the bugfix cycle is so
fast that repackaged binaries (especially commercial ones such as RedHat)
unavoidably lag behind by a very significant margin. For instance, Bram
Moolenaar (the Vim project leader and head maintainer) just uploaded nine new
bugfixes today, bringing the current version and patchlevel up to 7.0.144.
The list of bugfixes (with a one-line description of what each of them fixes)
can be read online at http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/7.0/README . You can
see what is new in version 7 as :help version7.txt in Vim 7.0, or, if
still using Vim 6.3 or 6.4, as a Vim helpfile located at
http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/runtime/doc/version7.txt
However, if you compile anything (not only Vim) you need not only a compiler
and linker with their libraries and header files, but also development
versions of every piece of software that the stuff you're compiling is using.
To compile any program which uses X, you need an X11-devel (or something: on
my system it's called xorg-x11-devel) package. To compile Vim with Motif, you
need not only a development X11 package, but also a development Motif
package, as well as development packages for everything else that Vim uses:
e.g., to compile Vim 7 with all interpreted-language interfaces, you need not
only mzscheme, perl, python, ruby and tcl installed, but also mzscheme-devel,
perl-devel, python-devel, ruby-devel and tcl-devel. To get the name of the RPM
you need, use rpm -qa | grep packagename where packagename is part or
all of the name of the companion non-development package you already have
installed. Tack -devel between the name and the version number to get the
development package name. For instance, the development package that goes
with xorg-x11-6.8.2-30 is xorg-x11-devel-6.8.2-30 ; the one which goes with
openmotif-2.2.3-11 is openmotif-devel-2.2.3-11 ; etc. IIRC, the full name of
the RPM file is the package name (with version etc.) with .rpm added at the end.
Since I didn't want headaches guessing what Vim did or didn't use, I installed
devel RPM packages of everything that I have installed (I'm on SuSE Linux,
which uses a software architecture quite similar to RedHat's) and Vim compiles
like a charm, with every single bell and whistle that I knew how to include.
Once I got it running flawlessly on both Windows and Linux, I wrote a pair of
HowTo pages: the one for Linux is at
http://users.skynet.be/antoine.mechelynck/vim/compunix.htm
Best regards,
Tony.
-Original Message-
From: Smith Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:32 AM
To: Anne Wall
Subject: RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
A quick scan for Xm.h reveals that it is a Motif header file; you would
need to install any required Motif header files (i.e., the associated
development package), or alternatively compile the non GUI version (via the
appropriate switch). This is Compiling 101 type stuff, and you should
probably consult a compilation from sources tutorial before you continue.
Why do you need to recompile Vim? Why not just use the appropriate
binaries?
On Redhat:
yum -y install vim
Provided of course yum has been set up :)
--Eric
BTW, Google is your friend: google Xm.h.
-Original Message-
From: Anne Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 17 October 2006 04:14 PM
To: Vim Mailing List
Subject: RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Do you mean X Windows? Motif? We're running X Windows, and it seems like it
has no problems. How would I tell if that's the problem? Do I need to
reinstall X Windows to get vim to compile?
{shudder}
-Original Message-
From: Vigil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:04 AM
To: Vim Mailing List
Subject: Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Perhaps X is not fully installed.
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006, Anne Wall wrote:
/usr/include/Xm/Xm.h:42:34: X11/extensions/Print.h: No such file or
directory
--
.
Confidentiality Warning
*==*
The contents of this e-mail and any accompanying documentation are
confidential and any use thereof, in what ever form, by anyone
RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Oh mah gah. That's the best. You've really encapsulated the whole deal here. Thank you, because that's pretty excellent. I already knew that there were about 132 patches for vim, and I optimistically applied every single one before trying the install the first time. That in itself was a bit silly, because I didn't realize that some of them are platform-specific. Oy. I'm going to give it a shot and get the other packages. -Original Message- From: A.J.Mechelynck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:53 PM To: Anne Wall Cc: 'Smith Eric'; Vim Mailing List Subject: Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0 Anne Wall wrote: I couldn't find any more recent binaries than 6.3, but I did find the RPMs for that, so I installed it, and the populace is happy and peaceful. Thanks for your help! I'm grateful for your kind advice. I was under some wrong impressions, especially thinking it's important to compile the source yourself. I tried redirecting my Motif directories to the correct ones, as it mentioned in the Makefile, but that didn't help. WELL, I take it back. It did properly find Print.h, so that was an improvement. It had errors, though, so not fixed. I did try to compile after diabling the GUI, but I still had the same problems. Then I finally wised up and gave up, went looking for binaries, and looked away, whistling, as I left the directory full of lovely vim source code to slowly gather dust and cd'd back to home. It does make sense to compile Vim yourself, because the bugfix cycle is so fast that repackaged binaries (especially commercial ones such as RedHat) unavoidably lag behind by a very significant margin. For instance, Bram Moolenaar (the Vim project leader and head maintainer) just uploaded nine new bugfixes today, bringing the current version and patchlevel up to 7.0.144. The list of bugfixes (with a one-line description of what each of them fixes) can be read online at http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/7.0/README . You can see what is new in version 7 as :help version7.txt in Vim 7.0, or, if still using Vim 6.3 or 6.4, as a Vim helpfile located at http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/runtime/doc/version7.txt However, if you compile anything (not only Vim) you need not only a compiler and linker with their libraries and header files, but also development versions of every piece of software that the stuff you're compiling is using. To compile any program which uses X, you need an X11-devel (or something: on my system it's called xorg-x11-devel) package. To compile Vim with Motif, you need not only a development X11 package, but also a development Motif package, as well as development packages for everything else that Vim uses: e.g., to compile Vim 7 with all interpreted-language interfaces, you need not only mzscheme, perl, python, ruby and tcl installed, but also mzscheme-devel, perl-devel, python-devel, ruby-devel and tcl-devel. To get the name of the RPM you need, use rpm -qa | grep packagename where packagename is part or all of the name of the companion non-development package you already have installed. Tack -devel between the name and the version number to get the development package name. For instance, the development package that goes with xorg-x11-6.8.2-30 is xorg-x11-devel-6.8.2-30 ; the one which goes with openmotif-2.2.3-11 is openmotif-devel-2.2.3-11 ; etc. IIRC, the full name of the RPM file is the package name (with version etc.) with .rpm added at the end. Since I didn't want headaches guessing what Vim did or didn't use, I installed devel RPM packages of everything that I have installed (I'm on SuSE Linux, which uses a software architecture quite similar to RedHat's) and Vim compiles like a charm, with every single bell and whistle that I knew how to include. Once I got it running flawlessly on both Windows and Linux, I wrote a pair of HowTo pages: the one for Linux is at http://users.skynet.be/antoine.mechelynck/vim/compunix.htm Best regards, Tony. -Original Message- From: Smith Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:32 AM To: Anne Wall Subject: RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0 A quick scan for Xm.h reveals that it is a Motif header file; you would need to install any required Motif header files (i.e., the associated development package), or alternatively compile the non GUI version (via the appropriate switch). This is Compiling 101 type stuff, and you should probably consult a compilation from sources tutorial before you continue. Why do you need to recompile Vim? Why not just use the appropriate binaries? On Redhat: yum -y install vim Provided of course yum has been set up :) --Eric BTW, Google is your friend: google Xm.h. -Original Message- From: Anne Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 17 October 2006 04:14 PM To: Vim Mailing List Subject: RE: Cannot compile vim 7.0 Do you mean X Windows? Motif
Re: Cannot compile vim 7.0
Anne Wall wrote: Oh mah gah. That's the best. You've really encapsulated the whole deal here. Thank you, because that's pretty excellent. Thanks for the compliment; I used to be a teacher. I already knew that there were about 132 patches for vim, and I optimistically applied every single one before trying the install the first time. That in itself was a bit silly, because I didn't realize that some of them are platform-specific. Oy. I'm going to give it a shot and get the other packages. I also apply every single patch as it gets published, and I have no problem with that (as I have downloaded the full sources, not only the unix and lang archives but also extra). Any modules that I don't need (such as Windows- or Mac-specific modules when compiling on Linux) are simply not compiled; and the binary which I just compiled neatly displays Included patches: 1-144 in the output of its :version command. Since (IIUC) the Unix shell expands the wildcards in lexicographic order, after downloading all patches into (let's say) ~/.build/vim/vim70/patches/, you can apply them (for your first v7 compile) by doing cd ~/.build/vim/vim70 cat patches/7.0.??? | patch -p0 For incremental patching (when a few new patches are published, and you've already applied the previous ones) it's usually easier to apply them one-by-one: e.g., the next one will be patch -p0 patches/7.0.145 unless of course Vim 7.1 comes out first ;-). Best regards, Tony.
