On Sun, Jul 20, 2003 at 08:22:16PM -0700, Bill Kendrick wrote:
>  $ make
>   
>  ...Compiling Tux Paint from source...
>  src/tuxpaint.c:141: SDL_image.h: No such file or directory
>  src/tuxpaint.c:143: #error "-------------------------------------------------"
>  src/tuxpaint.c:144: #error "If you installed SDL_image from a package, be sure"
>  src/tuxpaint.c:145: #error "to get the development package, as well!"
>  src/tuxpaint.c:146: #error "(e.g., 'libsdl-image1.2-devel.rpm')"
>  src/tuxpaint.c:147: #error "--------------------------------------------------"
>  make: *** [obj/tuxpaint.o] Error 1
> 
> 
> Pretty cool, no?
> 
> 
> Anyone see any problems with this method?

Aside from the rpm-centric message, nope :)

> (who notices a complete lack of naming standards when it comes to the
> SDL add-on libraries' header-file "#define"s...  ;^) )

You too, eh? :)

Ben
--
 ,-.  nSLUG    http://www.nslug.ns.ca   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 \`'  Debian   http://www.debian.org    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `          [ gpg 395C F3A4 35D3 D247 1387 2D9E 5A94 F3CA 0B27 13C8 ]
             [ pgp 7F DA 09 4B BA 2C 0D E0 1B B1 31 ED C6 A9 39 4F ]
_______________________________________________
Tuxpaint-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://tux4kids.net/mailman/listinfo/tuxpaint-dev

Reply via email to