On May 21, 2005, at 2:44 PM, Kyle Kline wrote:
>> in other words, something wrong with the package dependencies on your
>> system, not with subversion's ./configure
> Very true - SuSE 9.1 out of the box does NOT include many of the
> common GNU developer tools, and some of the ones it does include (or
> you can download using YaST) are outdated. More the fault of the
> distro not being geared toward developers.
On May 21, 2005, at 2:40 PM, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On May 20, 2005, at 9:33 PM, Scott Palmer wrote:
>> So autoconf fails again. I can't say that I'm surprised.
> What does this have to do with autoconf?
> As far as I can tell, it's a weirdness with library dependencies.
Isn't that one of the things that autoconf is supposed to figure
out? Shouldn't it tell me that I don't have some needed module?
Isn't that one of it's main reasons for being? If SuSE 9.1 was
suitable for compiling subversion isn't that exactly what autoconf
was going to detect with the zillions of queries of every
developement related property of my system that there could possibly be?
I guess the issue is that it doesn't realize in this case that there
are additional dependancies that apr-utils had? And apparently those
dependencies should have been resolved by the SuSE installation? I
just figured that if it was going to scan my system so completely
that it should have known that the build was going to fail.
> The apr-util library links to many other sub-libraries; it has a
> generic DBM interface, so it usually links to dbm, gdbm, or
> whatever dbm library it can find. It also as an XML interface, so
> it links to expat, libxml, or whatever it can find.
> It looks like whatever apr-util subversion was linking to, expected
> to be already linked to gdbm, and your system didn't have gdbm.
> This indicates to be something bogus with your pre-installed apr-
> util... in other words, something wrong with the package
> dependencies on your system, not with subversion's ./configure.
> Subversion picked up an installed apr-util, but the apr-util itself
> was already broken.
So apr-util is sitting on my system in a useless state? This is a
problem with SuSE 9.1 pretending to have apr-util installed but
actually it is missing big chunks that are required for apr-util to
actually be usable?
I could go into another rant about why Linux will probably still take
another 20 years to become usable for the mainstream.. but I'll
resist the urge this time... ;-)
All I can say is that building stuff shouldn't be this difficult, not
that it is a fault with subversion code in this case. It appears that
building anything on Linux is a roll of the dice. It's unfortunate
to say the least.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Sat May 21 23:41:08 2005