Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:32:56 +0000 From: Alistair Sutton <alistair.sutton@gmail.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> Cc: FreeBSD-gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libm Message-ID: <fa8f059505031316327592407f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20050313191932.O74062@april.chuckr.org> References: <20050313191932.O74062@april.chuckr.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:25:15 -0500 (EST), Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> 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? Al -- LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/everlone GPG/PGP: http://www.no-dns-yet.org.uk/~everlone/pubkey.gpg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fa8f059505031316327592407f>