Re: Gnumeric build problems

[jgotts linuxsavvy com]

In message <20010913124557 A19752 indonesia kscanners no>, Toralf Lund writes:

>Finally I understand. Everything is installed on
><prefix>/{lib|share>/<version>, not ...<version>-bonobo; apparently my
>bonobo version is too old (Well, it would be, it must be several *weeks*
>since I upgraded now. I think it's somewhat odd to require version >=1.0.8
>or whatever it is, though, I would normally expect >=1, >=2 and so on, or
>at least >=1.0, >=1.1 etc, but I guess that's a Bonobo versioning issue.) I
>should have noticed that earlier, of course, but since everything built
>successfully... (I also did the wrong king of search when I wanted to find
>out where all the plugin bits went, I admit.)

>In addition to that, some python stuff is missing, and I have no "*.css". I
>don't care about any of this right now, so I did [attached patch].

When updating the spec files, I assume an up-to-date stable GNOME
configuration.  At the moment, that means the latest versions of the packages
in the .../stable/sources directory and a small number of packages from
.../unstable/sources.  If you're rolling your own RPM's that makes the most
sense anyway.

As far as non-GNOME components like Python goes, anything from Red Hat 6.2,
7.0, or 7.1 should work.  So the spec files in CVS should be okay if 1) you are
updating your system with your own RPM's and 2) you have a version of Red Hat
released within the past couple of years.

If you mix and match binary RPM's from Ximian or other sources on the Internet
you may run into problems with the spec files.

John

-- 
John GOTTS <jgotts linuxsavvy com>  http://linuxsavvy.com/staff/jgotts