Re: GNOME vs GNU gcc & glibc

[bob kehs ksd org]

This is why I stress rpms or some other package managment... It is just
too ugly to have people compile stuff from source when there is so mutch
of it and it comes out so fast.

On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Sergio Brandano wrote:

> 
> >>  Ok, then we are speaking the same language. However, let me resume
> >>  the original problem, why do we need to compile 18+ source codes in
> >>  order to compile gnome-libs? I find it constraining.
> 
> >Well, you don't need 18 of them. That list you sent is not right. It's for
> >an old version, not even a 1.x one. It clearly says gnome 0.99.0.
> 
>  I am very sorry, but I just referred to the official instructions.
>  Please have a look at ``Compiling from Source'':
> 
> > http://www.gnome.org/gnome-1.0/gnome-1.0-source.shtml
> 
>  Maybe it is worth stressing the fact that some people out here are
>  spending days to set up this GNOME. Yes, the given instructions are
>  for the older version and RedHat machines, but I use Slackware, some
>  others use Solaris, and the sources are changing continuously.
> 
>  Beleave it or not, it is time consuming! I am glad that the number of
>  dependencies is more and more restricted, but how do we know it all?
>  How do we stay up-to date over (yes) 18+ packages that change day by
>  day in 18 different sites?
> 
>  I am tired. I give up.
> 
>  Sergio
> 
> 
> -- 
>         FAQ: Frequently-Asked Questions at http://www.gnome.org/gnomefaq
>          To unsubscribe: mail gnome-list-request@gnome.org with 
>                        "unsubscribe" as the Subject.
>