Re: [glade--]how to install glademm on RHL9
- From: Vladislav Grinchenko <vgrinche integ com>
- To: susumu yt com
- Cc: glademm-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [glade--]how to install glademm on RHL9
- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 11:58:13 -0500
Susumu,
I user both rh9 and fedora.
% rpm -qi libsigc++
libsigc++-1.2.2-1
Name : libsigc++ Relocations: /usr
Version : 1.2.2 Vendor: Karl E. Nelson <kenelson ece ucdavis edu>
Release : 1 Build Date: Tue 22 Apr 2003 03:15:20 PM EDT
Install Date: Thu 24 Apr 2003 Build Host: dedalus.3rdshift.com
Group : System Environment/Libraries Source RPM: libsigc++-1.2.2-1.src.rpm
Size : 134498 License: LGPL
Signature : (none)
Packager :
URL : http://libsigc.sourceforge.net/
Summary : The Typesafe Signal Framework for C++
On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 05:43:48PM +0100, Christof Petig wrote:
> Susumu Yoshida schrieb:
> >Thank for your reply again.
> >I am really sorry that I annoy you with an unfamiliar distribution.
>
> Not that annoying to be sure.
>
> >>If your linux distribution cannot give you automatic dependancy
> >>resolution (which I clearly doubt, given that RH/fedora still has
> >>users), you should consider a decent distribution. Perhaps apt-rpm is
> >>the correct solution for you.
> >
> >
> >According to you, I installed apt-rpm and tried again but failed.
>
> Oh, you did not fail. It gave you a decent error message:
>
> >nana:/home/susumu/SRC# apt-get install libsigc++-devel
> >Reading Package Lists... Done
> >Building Dependency Tree... Done
> >libsigc++-devel is already the newest version.
>
> Perhaps this is libsigc++-1.0 which is the old one for gtkmm1. This used
> to be called libsigc++ (without a version number). Or ... I heard
> _rumors_ that redhat/fedora had made some debatable decisions to give
> incompatible packages the same (but shorter) name. Perhaps sigc++ 1.2 is
> called libsigc++, too and you got the wrong one.
>
> >nana:/home/susumu/SRC# apt-get install gtkmm2
> >Reading Package Lists... Done
> >Building Dependency Tree... Done
> >Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
> >requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
> >distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
> >or been moved out of Incoming.
> >
> >Since you only requested a single operation it is extremely likely that
> >the package is simply not installable and a bug report against
> >that package should be filed.
> >The following information may help to resolve the situation:
> >
> >The following packages have unmet dependencies:
> > gtkmm2: Depends: libsigc-1.2.so.5
> >E: Broken packages
>
> >See? The newest version of both libsigc++ and libsigc++-devel are
> >already installed on my machine but when I try to "apt-get install gtkmm2",
> >it says "libsigc-1.2 is UNMET".
> >Does it make sense?
>
> Yes. Somewhat. It looks like you mixed packages from different
> incompatible sources. Or apt-rpm can not live to its expectations ;-)
>
> >
> >You say
> >
> >
> >>Shocked and glad to not _had_ to compile gtkmm myself for several years
> >
> >
> >but is it much easier to use gtkmm on Debian (which is
> > your distribution,right?) ?
>
> Debian is my distribution and while it has different issues (sometimes
> transitions take a long time which is mostly due to decisions of the
> people involved or lack of maintainer's spare time) I grew really fond
> of its package management.
>
> The gnome 2.4 situation in sid (unstable) is really good. Sarge
> (testing) is slowly getting there and woody (stable) is hopelessly frozen.
>
> But fedora should not be a bad choice either (from what I have heard).
>
> Christof
>
> _______________________________________________
> glademm-list mailing list
> glademm-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/glademm-list
--
______________________________________________________
Vladislav Grinchenko e-mail (w): vgrinche integ com
Software Engineer (h): 3rdshift comcast net
Integral Systems, Inc.
Focus on quality, and productivity will follow.
______________________________________________________
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]