Plinnell schrieb: > On Thursday 26 June 2008 14:34:05 John Culleton wrote: >> On Wednesday 25 June 2008 03:25:35 am Craig Bradney wrote: >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> Subject: Re: [scribus] 1.3.3.12 no odt support??? >>>> From: Rolf-Werner Eilert <eilert-sprachen at t-online.de> >>>> To: cbradney at zipworld.com.au,"Scribus User Mailing List" >>> <scribus at lists.scribus.info> >>> >>>> Date: 25-06-2008 8:40 >>>> >>>> Craig Bradney schrieb: >>>>> Theres nothing wrong with the source that I can see... >>>>> >>>>> before you run configure, please run >>>>> make -f Makefile.svn >>>>> >>>>> as per: >>>>> http://docs.scribus.net/index.php?lang=en&page=install3 >>>>> >>>>> I have just gone through and tested many scenarious of code, >>>>> missing >>> includes, >>> >>>>> incorrect autohell versions etc, with the tarball and had all >>>>> of the mentioned issues. Running the make -f line fixed it in >>>>> one go with no workarounds. >>>>> >>>>> Craig >>>> Even if it's not the svn version, Craig? I got the ordinary >>>> source of the stable 1.3.3.12 to compile. >>> Having not used autohell for awhile it took me awhile to go through >>> the elimination process last night. I finally remembered we had >>> issues like this in the past and it was because the person had not >>> run make -f Makefile.svn. It will depend on your system as to >>> whether you need this or not, I found I always had to run it in the >>> past. >>> >>> Use cmake.. you hair wont go grey, and you wont be pulling it out >>> at every call to configure. No nasty spells required either. >>> >>> Craig >> The instructions for cmake describe a more complex and for me at least >> confusing process than the traditional process. I recognize that the >> developers see virtues in cmake. But perhaps after development is >> completed the install process could be boiled down to the usual >> method for us busy folks that keep many Open Source products on our >> systems. If every product develops its own unique installation >> software then life becomes unnecessarily complex. I have seen other >> products (Inkscape as I recall) follow other paths looking for the >> ideal installation system. But for the end user the ideal method is >> something that works and is reasonably simple and universal. > > Yes, and that is why Inkscape has started to migrate to Cmake as well. :) > >> Other Open Source products (e.g Gimp) compile and install nicely with >> ./configure >> make >> make install >> and have for many years. And Scribus used to. > > Hmm.. > > cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/path/whereyouwant/scribus > make > make install > > Not so complicated to me and the error messages are readable by mere humans. >> I keep multiple versions of Scribus installed by the simple expedient >> of putting the source of each version in a separate directory and >> renaming the executable of the older versions with e.g. scribus11. >> So I don't see any virtue in cmake to the end user. >> > For starters: > Faster > Better clearer error messages > Cross platform It works on Windows/OSX/Linux > Easier to maintain for developers, so we can spend more time coding :) > Prevents developers hair loss and temporary bouts of insanity. :) > >> After running >> make -f Makefile.svn >> Scribus 1.3.3.12 compiles but can't find its plugins on execution. >> Given this degree of uncertainty I will stick with 1.3.3.11 as the >> stable version and wait for the next major version. I have wasted too >> much time on 1.3.3.12 already. It is only a minor release. > > <snipped> > > Excepting this issue, there are important fixes in 1.3.3.12. > > Peter
Yes, and that's why I'd like to have it running here :-) But can I use cmake on the same sources I downloaded now? And what exactly do I type to just have the same effect like ./configure make make install If you just could give me a start, I'd like to give it a try... Rolf
