On 28-09-2014 13:59, Christopher Gregory wrote:
On Mon, September 29, 2014 5:19 am, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
On 28-09-2014 11:19, Christopher Gregory wrote:
I am re-sending this as a new posting as I have just completed a
destdir installation using the following:
mkdir build && pushd build && cmake -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release \
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr \
-DCMAKE_SKIP_RPATH=ON \
-DPORT=GTK \
-DENABLE_GTKDOC=ON \
-DUSE_SYSTEM_MALLOC=ON \
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_DOCDIR=/usr/share/doc \
-DLIB_INSTALL_DIR=/usr/lib .. &&
make -j1
In addition to the above points, I notice that system_malloc is also
disabled by default. Should this be included as I have done on my
system?
I left as optional. No strong reason for that. If anyone else answers
your question, we may rethink, right?
Also the sbu value has doubled, at least for me with this build.
For me a little less than double, so we are in the same track.
Christopher, thanks for sharing all this with us.
Have not yet started to study this package. After Epiphany failed to
build in series 2.4, it is evident that WebKitGtk-2.6.0 it needs to go into
the book. However, the other packages have not yet been ported to this
version, thus WebKitGTK+-2.4.5 must stay in the book. This is being
discussed in ticket #5575:
Hello Fernando,
I already had in the back of my mind to put up a seperate page with this
application due to the incompatibility at this stage with most other
things.
OK. I misread that other post.
The new directories are:
/usr/include/webkitgtk-4.0,
/usr/lib/webkit2gtk-4.0,
/usr/libexec/webkit2gtk-4.0,
/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/webkit2gtk-4.0, and
/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/webkitdomgtk-4.0
The library names are:
libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so and
libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so
The interesting thing is that with this particular version they have
created a new directory in libexec, whereas the previous version placed
the files directly in libexec, so this seems to be why we are going to be
able to install both versions side by side.
To this end, I have just finished creating a new page for this version,
however I have not yet run make validate and undoubtably changes will need
to be made as I may well not have everything up to the required BLFS
standards.
Our pages are a little different, much due to different styles and
points of view, only.
Thank you very much.
Your posts were very useful and much facilitated my task. And some
point, such as the libexec subdirectory, were very clarifying.
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
