Mail Archives: geda-user/2013/02/25/07:11:31
Peter TB Brett wrote:
>> If autopoint and gettext are no longer packaged together, then would
>> this be a good candidate for a patch?
>>
>
> autopoint is part of gettext. The README file states that you must
> install gettext. Some distributions package autopoint in a
> gettext-devel package. The README notes this, and that you will need to
> install any appropriate "-devel" or "-dev" packages. Furthermore,
> autopoint is only required if building from git. We expect users
> building from git to have the ability to read and follow the really very
> simple instructions in the README.
Um...
I always thought, the whole business of ./autogen.sh and ./configure is to
to check for this kind of dependencies. Who else but those who compile
from git source would need to run the configure script in the first place?
> There's no bug, and nothing to patch.
Well, let's say it is a wart ;-)
I too have been scratching my head more than once when configure was
successfull, but compile still failed. Configure checks should be designed
in a way that it catches missing packages from major distros. E.g, Debian
often splits *.h files into a separate package. Debian is the one of the
major distros out there -- 5 of the current top ten at distrowatch.com are
debian or derivatives. So chances are good, that whoever wants to compile
geda from source, will do it with a system that splits packages like
Debian does. IMHO, configure script should be able to deal with this.
Yes, I know about this. And I live with it since about 7 years. Still, I
tend to need more than one approach when I set up a geda build environment
from scratch.
---<)kaiamrtin(>---
- Raw text -