From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 14 00:38:58 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A41316A4CE for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:38:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from april.chuckr.org (april.chuckr.org [66.92.151.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D85EA43D2D for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:38:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from april.chuckr.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by april.chuckr.org (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j2E0ew92074605; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:40:58 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost)j2E0ewsY074602; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:40:58 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) X-Authentication-Warning: april.chuckr.org: chuckr owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:40:57 -0500 (EST) From: Chuck Robey To: Alistair Sutton In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050313193825.H74062@april.chuckr.org> References: <20050313191932.O74062@april.chuckr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: FreeBSD-gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libm X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:38:58 -0000 On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Alistair Sutton wrote: > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:25:15 -0500 (EST), Chuck Robey wrote: > > I'm still trying to build gnome-2.10 ... it's broken right now in building > > audio/arts. The current error is one that's becoming depressingly > > familiar: moc died, it's missing a "libm.so.2". In the past, for all > > these kind of errors, I would track down the executable that needed the > > old libm, but I am wondering, maybe it wouldn't be all that horrible a > > thing, to fake it out? > > > > Would it work for me, do you think, to have a softlink, from libc to libm? > > Woud it hurt anything? (As long as I didn't try to propagate anything that > > wanted to use libm!) Would it actually work, solve that dependency > > problem? > > > > Or am I actually, for some reason, really better served by tracking down > > the old software and relink it? That's a heck of a lot of extra work, you > > understand, right? > > How are you trying to build gnome 2.10? > > Are you installing it from scratch or are you upgrading from a > previous release using gnome_upgrade.sh? gnome_upgrade, I have the script. I was just scouting out the lazy man's way of things, trying to see if I could avoid about 3 tons of extra recompiling, that's all. The method I'm suggesting seems to work, I'm wondering, if I do this, am I getting ready to cut my throat somehow, or is it a fairly OK idea? > > Al > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include C & Java programming, FreeBSD, chuckr@chuckr.org | electronics, communications, and SF/Fantasy. New Year's Resolution: I will not sphroxify gullible people into looking up fictitious words in the dictionary (on the wall at my old fraternity, Signa Phi Nothing). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------