Date: Sat, 16 Mar 1996 10:52:07 -0800 From: "Amancio Hasty Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Kim Culhan <kimc@w8hd.org> Cc: multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: managing multiple libtcl.so versions Message-ID: <199603161852.KAA04063@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 16 Mar 1996 11:12:26 EST." <Pine.BSF.3.91.960316110459.17995A-100000@moonpie.w8hd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sdr should be recompiled statically. I don't have the sources however I am sure the person who has them will be more than happy to provide a static binary version. As for nv well if no one in the list is harrasing the author to upgrade to tk4.x then I guess we should find alternatives to nv or just forget about nv in the meantime . To say the least the current deployment of tk3.1, tk4.1a2 , and tk41b3 is a real mess. BTW: tk4.1b3 breaks all the m-bone tools and minor mods to the mbones tools will have to be done. I suspect that for many moons we will have tk4.1a2 based apps :( The only mbone tool which still uses tk3.1 is nv. I suggest grabbing the CU-SEEME section in nv and addding it to vic. If we do that there shall be very few reasons to use nv specially since major mbone events nowdays use vic. Any takers??? Amancio >>> Kim Culhan said: > > Revisiting the mbone tools project I tried to run sdr from amancio's > ftp site and it wants "libtcl74.so.1.0" > > This appears to be the shared lib built from the current build setup for > tcl74 in ports. > > Since the need for having multiple tcl shared libs versions is probably > common at the present, I was intereseted in how others have setup their > environment to handle this. > > AFAIK nv still requires the older versions of tcl/tk, what > approach works well to satisfy this requirement? > > regards > kim > > -- > kimc@w8hd.org >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603161852.KAA04063>