OK, sorry. I neglected to install the boost-devel package. I have done that now and the /waf configure worked, so the actual compilation should as also work. It's about 1/4 of the way done. I will report back...
Sean On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Sean Beeson <[email protected]> wrote: > Christopher, > > On following the instructions I get... > > [root@localhost 3.4]# ./waf configure > Setting top to : /opt/ardour/3.4 > Setting out to : /opt/ardour/3.4/build > Checking for 'gcc' (c compiler) : /usr/bin/gcc > Checking for 'g++' (c++ compiler) : /usr/bin/g++ > > Global Configuration > * Install prefix : /usr/local > * Debuggable build : True > * Build documentation : False > > Ardour Configuration > * Will build against private GTK dependency stack : no > * Will rely on libintl built into libc : yes > * Will build against private Ardour dependency stack : no > Checking for boost library >= 1.39 : too old > Please install boost version 1.39 or higher. > The configuration failed > (complete log in /opt/ardour/3.4/build/config.log) > > I have boost 1.53 installed, so I am not sure at this point what to try. I > am building this on a F19 x86_64. > > Sean > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:29 AM, Christopher R. Antila < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On 09/11/2013 12:42 PM, Sean Beeson wrote: >> > Is compiling for source the only way to still get Ardour 3 on Fedora 19? >> > >> > If so, does anyone have any good how to on dealing with the >> dependencies? >> >> Hi Sean: >> >> With little effort, I found these instructions for Ardour 3.1: >> https://blogs.fsfe.org/samtuke/?p=548 >> >> Please let us know whether they still work. >> >> However, I feel we should start a discussion on what to do about Ardour, >> now that they have asked distributions not to package their software. >> This is actually a serious ethical dilemma. >> >> Possible Options Include: >> >> 1.) Package Ardour 3 against the developers' wishes, making no >> additional changes. >> >> 2.) Package Ardour 3 against the developers' wishes, making some change >> that encourages donating money to the project. >> >> 3.) Continue to package Ardour 2, accepting responsibility for >> maintaining software that's abandoned by the upstream developers. >> >> 4.) Drop Ardour from the distribution, since we do not wish to maintain >> the Ardour 2.8.x series or package the Ardour 3.x series against the >> developers' wishes. >> >> 5.) ? >> >> I favour the first or second options, since the free software audio >> community is so small that we can't afford the added difficulty of using >> such an important piece of software. On the other hand, the free >> software audio community is so small that we can't afford creating a >> rift with the Ardour developers. If we choose one of these options, we >> should be sure to involve the developers in our decision-making process. >> >> If the SIG wishes, I would be happy to research the state of Ardour in >> other distributions. >> >> >> Christopher >> _______________________________________________ >> music mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music > > >
_______________________________________________ music mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/music
