[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Xpert]Problem compiling kde-base3.0beta2 for lfs



On Fri 30 Aug 2002 18:50, Marc Aurele La France wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, John Gay wrote:
> > I'm copying both lists because this problem appears to be related to X.
> >
> > I'm building a Linux From Scratch box and I have XFree86 from cvs
> > working. At the moment I have xfce running as a window manager but I
> > wanted to try KDE3. I've got the sources for KDE3.0beta2 from a DVD, so
> > this is what I'm trying to build. qt and kde-libs built fine and I've
> > made sure I've got all the misc. libs that I need, but when I built
> > kde-base, the build failed in kcontrol/kfontinst/kfoninst. Here is the
> > relevant fail info, I think:
> >
> > Making all in kfontinst
> > make[4]: Entering directory
> > `/usr/src/kde/kdebase-3.0beta2/kcontrol/kfontinst/kfontinst'
> > /bin/sh ../../../libtool --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
> > -I../../.. -I/usr/include/freetype2  -I/usr/kde/include -I/usr/qt/include
> > -I/usr/X11R6/include   -DQT_THREAD_SUPPORT  -D_REENTRANT  -DNDEBUG
> > -DNO_DEBUG -O2 -O3 -march=i586 -mcpu=i586 -fno-exceptions -fno-check-new
> > -DQT_CLEAN_NAMESPACE -DQT_NO_COMPAT -DQT_NO_ASCII_CAST  -c -o Config.lo
> > `test -f Config.cpp || echo './'`Config.cpp
> > g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../.. -I/usr/include/freetype2
> > -I/usr/kde/include -I/usr/qt/include -I/usr/X11R6/include
> > -DQT_THREAD_SUPPORT -D_REENTRANT -DNDEBUG -DNO_DEBUG -O2 -O3 -march=i586
> > -mcpu=i586
> > -fno-exceptions -fno-check-new -DQT_CLEAN_NAMESPACE -DQT_NO_COMPAT
> > -DQT_NO_ASCII_CAST -c Config.cpp  -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/Config.o
> > In file included from Config.cpp:45:
> > xftint.h:280: declaration of C function `int XftDirScan(XftFontSet *,
> > const char *)' conflicts with
> > /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xft/Xft.h:127: previous declaration `FcBool
> > XftDirScan(FcFontSet *, const char *, int)' here
> > xftint.h:392: `XftValueList' was not declared in this scope
> > xftint.h:392: `v1orig' was not declared in this scope
> > xftint.h:393: `XftValueList' was not declared in this scope
> > xftint.h:393: `v2orig' was not declared in this scope
> > xftint.h:394: parse error before `)'
> > make[4]: *** [Config.lo] Error 1
> > make[4]: Leaving directory
> > `/usr/src/kde/kdebase-3.0beta2/kcontrol/kfontinst/kfontinst'
> > make[3]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> > make[3]: Leaving directory
> > `/usr/src/kde/kdebase-3.0beta2/kcontrol/kfontinst' make[2]: ***
> > [all-recursive] Error 1
> > make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/kde/kdebase-3.0beta2/kcontrol'
> > make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/kde/kdebase-3.0beta2'
> > make: *** [all] Error 2
> > bash-2.05a#
> >
> > So it seems to be complaining that
> > function `int XftDirScan(XftFontSet *, const char *)'
> > in xftint.h conflicts with
> > declaration `FcBool XftDirScan(FcFontSet *, const char *, int)'
> > in /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xft/Xft.h:127:
> >
> > So you can see why I might think this is related to X as well as KDE. I'm
> > not much of a programmer and since I've only got a dial-up connection
> > with pay-per-minute phone rates I don't really want to fetch the latest
> > stable version of KDE.
> >
> > Can someone please help me get around this? It seems to be only a small
> > problem that is stopping me from finishing the build of kde-base.
>
> Your xftint.h is out of date.  It also seems that KDE provides its own,
> which doesn't strike me as a very good idea.
>
My lfs system does not have /usr/X11R6/include/X11/Xft/xftint.h but my 
Debian system does. I found that the KDE version of xftint.h is only used if 
Xft is available. Since I don't use it on the lfs box, I disabled HAVE_XFT in 
the top-level config.h and it's now compiling away fine.

This still leaves the question why does kde3.0beta2 contain a duplicate 
xftint.h file? Certainly it should use the one from X? Or is this just 
something strange about the beta version I have?

Thanks for the info, though if I had looked in the sources first, I probably 
would have found this anyway.

Cheers,

	John Gay



Reply to: