From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 9 14:46:26 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF74116A420 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 14:46:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pgnews@netzwerkcenter.ch) Received: from mailthree.netzwerkcenter.ch (mailthree.everynet.ch [217.168.44.63]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16ED743D4C for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 14:46:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pgnews@netzwerkcenter.ch) Received: from dhcp87.int.siconline.net (border8.siconline.net [217.168.44.33]) by mailthree.netzwerkcenter.ch (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k29EkLXt007585 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2006 15:46:21 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from pgnews@netzwerkcenter.ch) From: Peter Guhl To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <1141899082.907.7.camel@nelke.int.0808.ch> References: <1141899082.907.7.camel@nelke.int.0808.ch> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: NetzWerk Center GmbH Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 15:46:21 +0100 Message-Id: <1141915581.907.19.camel@nelke.int.0808.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: big trouble with /usr/ports/textproc/wv X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 14:46:26 -0000 Hi again On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 11:11 +0100, Peter Guhl wrote: > /usr/ports/textproc/wv, part of the dependencies, fails: > configure: error: * * * unable to find libwmf-config; unable to continue > * * * > > libwmf is installed. libwmf-config is in /usr/local/bin. I installed the package now leaving the port alone. At ftp.freebsd.org I got wv-1.0.0_4.tbz while the port wants to install wv-1.0.0_5 - a newer one. I wonder what I get from this... but it seems to continue compiling the other stuff now. For me it looks kind of strange that the port installs a newer version than the newest (?) package available. It's even more funny if just that port fails to compile... but I can hardly believe I really got a broken port this time and not just another stupid error of mine. Do you all know something I don't know? I did not yet read "UPDATING" since I do only installing, not updating. Regards Peter