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

Re: Gwebdec



David R. Litwin wrote:

> I'm trying to install gwebdec, a programme that mimics webshots
> (designed for windows).
>
> Now, it gives instructions on how to install it. I downloaded the file
> gwebdec-0.24.1.tar.gz
> <http://www.jamesbarford.net/downloads/gwebdec-0.24.1.tar.gz> then
> attempted to implement the instruction it gives on how to install it.
> They are thus:
>
> ungzip and untar. That went splendidly.
> Next, it says Makefile. Well, firstly, it does not work unless I do
> ./Makefile.

This is a security feature of Debian. Many Unix and Unix-like operating
systems do not have this safety feature.

> Secondly, it just doesn't work. It is long enough that I have included
> it as an attachment.

I'm no programmer/compiler (but if I was, I'd be K++ :-) ), but I see a
couple of issues right off:

> ./Makefile: line 5: all:: command not found
> ./Makefile: line 7: test:: command not found


I'm guessing that on line 5 of the makefile is the command "all", which
is not found on your system. Same for "test" in line 7, although I
thought "test" was a built-in function of BASH, which makes me wonder if
perhaps the makefile expects BASH (or some other shell) and you're not
using it.

> ->Config file write was sucesfull


I know programmers are not known for their ability to spell, but you'd
think with the necessity of getting the code's syntax perfect, they'd
learn to do better with the comments/output also. Go figure. For me,
this puts doubts into my mind of the code's quality. The code may be
fine; I'm just saying that whereas before I saw "sucesfull" I was
neutral towards this program, now I'm a bit more wary of it.

> ./Makefile: line 11: gwebdec:: command not found

See if "gwebdec" now exists in the directory, and has executable
permissions.


> No package 'gtk+-2.0' found

Looks like maybe you need gtk+-2.0 installed. (But like I implied, I'm
not very conversant with libraries, etc, so I don't really know what I'm
talking about.)

And etc etc etc.

-- 
Kent




Reply to: