baslinux AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Baslinux mailing list
List archive
Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again))
- From: 3aoo-cvfd AT dea.spamcon.org
- To: baslinux AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again))
- Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 21:28:41 +1200
Matrix Mole wrote:
>
> Most sites I've seen that have had source packages for
> people to d/l and build themselves don't usually mention
> the packages that may be needed (perhaps they assume the
> downloader has a fully installed system
That is precisely the reason. The vast majority of Linux
users have a big installation of Linux (a gigabyte or more)
that includes all of those things.
> Is it possible to just look though the source and see what
> is needed (by looking at the include lines for example)?
You can sometimes spot things by looking throught the Makefile,
but it won't give you everything.
> Obviosuly, when you attempt to compile a program, and it spits
> out errors about missing libraries,
That's the easiest way to find what's missing (although the key
clue is sometimes a fair way up the listing).
> would it be easier to pry the needed library out of the package
> it is found in, or simply to isntall the package?
Install the whole package. There are sometimes other bits and
pieces in the package that are needed for the missing component
to work.
> For those wishing to do a large number of compiling and development,
> would it be easier to have a completely seperate system that is
> strictly used for that purpose with all the slakware/d1 packages
> installed?
If you have room, there is no good reason not to do everything on
one system. However, in my case, my HDs are relatively small so
I run the compiler on a second machine and transfer just the
finished binaries to my main machine.
Cheers,
Steven
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)
, (continued)
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Matrix Mole, 05/23/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Sindi Keesan, 05/23/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Matrix Mole, 05/23/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Ron Clarke, 05/23/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
3aoo-cvfd, 05/24/2004
- Re: [BL] Glibc version (again), Ron Clarke, 05/24/2004
- Re: [BL] Glibc version (again), Sindi Keesan, 05/24/2004
- Re: [BL] Glibc version (again), Matrix Mole, 05/25/2004
- Re: [BL] Glibc version (again), 3aoo-cvfd, 05/25/2004
- Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), Matrix Mole, 05/25/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), 3aoo-cvfd, 05/26/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), James Miller, 05/26/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), 3aoo-cvfd, 05/26/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
3aoo-cvfd, 05/24/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), Matrix Mole, 05/27/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), Sindi Keesan, 05/27/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), Matrix Mole, 05/28/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Ron Clarke, 05/23/2004
- Re: Compiling (Was Re: [BL] Glibc version (again)), 3aoo-cvfd, 05/27/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Matrix Mole, 05/23/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Sindi Keesan, 05/23/2004
-
Re: [BL] Glibc version (again),
Matrix Mole, 05/23/2004
- Re: [BL] Glibc version (again), Ron Clarke, 05/26/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.