Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] gnucash - was Re: gtkmm2 and gtkmm3... On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 05:43:51PM -0800, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > Em 19-02-2012 16:51, Ken Moffat escreveu: > > That's good, but I'm only interested in LFS-7.0 (or later) for the > > book. We've upgraded libguile, glib, gtk and a host of other > > things. OTOH, I know you upgrade your old systems, so I can't say > > for certain that *you* can't make it work on LFS-7.0 :) I know *I* > > can't. > > > > Äen > > Hi, Ken, > > Of course you could :-), but I understand you have many more priorities and > are doing the best. > No, I did an all-nighter on Saturday to get it to build. Along the way I found several reports that it was b0rken with guile-2.0. Fedora *appear* to have it working, so I followed what they are doing (apart from one patch to make the build less noisy). Didn't work for me, so I'm all-but certain that either, or both, of gtkhtml3-on-current-glib/gtk (probably glib), and libguile2.0, are the problem. Of course, it's also possible that fedora do something extra/different in gtkhtml3. Remember that I never understood how to *use* it in the past - it needs someone who can do that, preferably on a fresh install so that the files it wants to set up are not pre-existing, to find out how to make it work > Problem with gnucash-2.4.10 in LFS6.5 solved. PATH variable was completely > wrong, so gconftool-2 could not be found. After correcting it and using > update-gnucash-gconf (I read about it in your mail) it runs correctly. > good > I intend to build lxde, gnome-2, gnucash-2.4.10 and libreoffice-3.5.0 (forgot > to mention this as my other "gnome dependent package") in "LFS 7.0 svn". When > and if succeeded, I will let you know. > I'll be interested - the old OOo looked too painful for my minimalist instincts, and abiword + gnumeric do what I need. But notes on current libreoffice might be useful. > (I understand from your previous posts that gnome-3 would not run gnucash? > The problem, from the book's point of view, is that gnome-2 has gone - apart from the 'deprecated' packages that I asked to be kept until we can get rid of them. > We discussed before and I just remembered that I cleaned a little bit further > gtkmm-3.2.0 directories: > > /usr/{{include,lib}/{gdkmm-3.0,gtkmm-3.0},share/{devhelp/books,doc}/gtkmm-3.0} > > This might be usefull when you upgrade the page. > Yeah, particularly with Wayne's gnome-3 packages there is often more detail than I would have included. In my opinion, if a directory is only created by a particular package, we don't need to list all the directories below it. OTOH, sometimes apparently unrelated packages install directories below a directory I thought belonged to another package. Äen -- das eine Mal als TragÃdie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page |