Re: glib install problems

[Anthony DiSante <orders nodivisions com>]

Sven Neumann wrote:
> Most binary packages install themselves to the /usr prefix, while
> source packages go to /usr/local. By not touching any files in the
> /usr prefix you can be sure that all files there are handled by the
> package manager. It's a simple rule that can be quite helpful.

Good to know.  How much of a consistent rule is that?

> > I would rather have just one version installed, but I gather that
> > removing the old version is going to break some of my currently
> > installed apps.  (As I said, I temporarily removed just a few files
> > from /usr/lib/ and already lots of apps won't run.)
>
>
> If you provided the new versions in /usr/local/lib and configured the
> linker correctly, your apps should have used the gtk+-2.4. Since this
> library is backward-compatible, this should just work.

Well, gtk-2.4 isn't installed yet; it still won't make without error.  (I 
posted a message yesterday called "can't compile gtk+-2.4.0" that explains 
the error.)

> > from source, and glib/gtk is the only thing that consistently gives
> > me problems. I should be able to just have them installed in one
> > place, and upgrade them when they need it, without having to worry
> > about breaking all my apps or having to manage two separate
> > installations in two places.
>
>
> Why don't you just do that then? If you have the old versions
> installed from source in /usr, why do you put the new ones to
> /usr/local ?

I never specify installation locations.  Apparently the default used to be 
/usr and now it's /usr/local.  But if I now install 2.4.0 over top of the 
old stuff at /usr, isn't that going to break things?

-Anthony
http://nodivisions.com/