Re: x11amp 0.9-beta1.1
On Wed, Apr 14, 1999 at 10:29:32PM -0500, surak@imsa.edu wrote:
> >
> > Actually, I'm basically running a glibc2 version of potato. :) (I
> > compiled many of the potato stuff using the glibc2 in slink on a slink
> > system). I'm still a little squeamish about glibc2.1 and I'm running
> > potato at work where ddd has just stopped working since upgrading from
> > slink. I need ddd at home, so I'm not willing to take that step yet.
> Ah well, back in the day I was running a mostly slink system with a few
> potato libraries force-installed, so I see where you're coming from. :)
Actually, I didn't force-install anything. What I've been doing is getting
the .dsc, .diff, and orig.tar.gz files for what I need from potato and
compiling a glibc2 version. I'm a little scared of mixing the two even though
from what I've read, it should work.
> > Thanks for posting that... made me look at mine which is almost the
> > same... except for a few key differences: The first 4 libraries are
> > missing! Well, that'll cause the errors I was getting, unfortunately, I
> > haven't the foggiest idea how to correct that.
>
> > I do, though it hasn't caused a problem in the past (even with
> > x11amp-0.9a[123]) I have libgtk1 installed for the version of gimp I run
> > (I've been meaning to upgrade, maybe this is an excuse) but not
> > libgtk1-dev, so I don't see how stuff like this could be happening.
> I had a problem with the old slink packages of the libraries, so gtk-config
> was giving me the wrong one. So instead of compiling the new libraries in
> /usr/local I just replaced them with potato ones (pre-glibc2.1 days).
Ok, I'll go compile the potato versions of gtk and glib. Does your gtk-config
--libs return '-lgtk' or '-lgtk1.2'? I suppose if you just have one version
of gtk installed, this is a non-issue.
> I'm at a loss as to why x11amp can't find those files. Maybe you need to
> explicitly put /usr/lib in your $LD_LIBRARY_PATH? I unset it but it didn't
> affect my x11amp.
Yeah, I tried that one. It looked like that might be the problem since none
of the libs it pulls in are in /usr/lib, but the gcc line I quoted has
'-L/usr/lib' in it which should eliminate this need (if I'm right about what
LD_LIBRARY_PATH does).
[snippage]
Reply to: