At 14:01 Uhr +0900 21.01.2002, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
>Have you tried it with db 3.3 ? Are they really that incompatible?
>If it doesn't work, I'd suggest adding db-3.1.17 as another source,
>compiling it static, installing it in somewhere in the build folder,
>and then linking evolution against
I think option 3 would work best for now, unless other packages need
db3.1.17 (I don't think they do). I don't think we want another db package.
> I have thought about this a little more,
> Option 1)
> I will make you a 3.1.17 package. You'll have to make sure it
> links against libdb-3.1 not li
I have thought about this a little more,
Option 1)
I will make you a 3.1.17 package. You'll have to make sure it
links against libdb-3.1 not lib db3 and you'll have to add
-I%p/include/db31 to your CFLAGS (the headers will be in
db31/db3). The package will depend on db3, and only install the
3
Yeah, I tried it with db 3.3 and 4 and configure won't run unless you have
3.1.17. It even says so in the read me. I guess I will have to follow
Peter's advice.
> Have you tried it with db 3.3 ? Are they really that incompatible?
> If it doesn't work, I'd suggest adding db-3.1.17 as another
> sou
Have you tried it with db 3.3 ? Are they really that incompatible?
If it doesn't work, I'd suggest adding db-3.1.17 as another
source, compiling it static, installing it in somewhere in the
build folder, and then linking evolution against the static lib.
Did you put the mutexes back into 3.1.17
Title: db3 (& Evolution)
Quick Question, I am down to 2 errors compiling evolution and I was looking around at how it will fit in with the current fink packages. Evolution requires Berkley's db 3.1.17. Splitting db into db3 and db4 was a good idea, but db3 is version 3.3.11. What do packages t
