On Thursday 21 February 2008 15:03, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 12:20, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > After what I went through, I'd recommend that someone strongarm ALL
> > > variables to the Qt4 values, and not leave anything to c
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 11:42:01AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Could you explain why?
> >
> > Qt 4 does not use any QT4* environment variables.
>
> No, this is our doing. But did qt3's qmake use QTDIR variables?
Qt 3 relied in several pla
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Could you explain why?
>
> Qt 4 does not use any QT4* environment variables.
No, this is our doing. But did qt3's qmake use QTDIR variables?
JMarc
On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 03:42:25PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> After what I went through, I'd recommend that someone strongarm ALL
> >> variables to the Qt4 values, and not leave anything to chance.
> >
> > The QT4* values are (contrary to
Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > The QT4* values are (contrary to Qt 3 ones) _not_ needed, neither by
>> > a distribution nor by LyX.
>>
>> Could you explain why?
>
> I'm not sure which statement you'd like explained. The statement I made
> was "After what I went through, I'd recommend
On Tuesday 04 March 2008 09:42, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> After what I went through, I'd recommend that someone strongarm ALL
> >> variables to the Qt4 values, and not leave anything to chance.
> >
> > The QT4* values are (contrary to Qt 3 ones) _n
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> After what I went through, I'd recommend that someone strongarm ALL
>> variables to the Qt4 values, and not leave anything to chance.
>
> The QT4* values are (contrary to Qt 3 ones) _not_ needed, neither by
> a distribution nor by LyX.
Could you expla
On Friday 22 February 2008 03:18, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Steve Litt wrote:
> > How much backward compatibility? Here's my belief:
> >
> > Age of tools when distro is created: 6 months
> > Age of distro when installed: 4 months
> > Time between distro upgrades 24 months
> >
Steve Litt wrote:
How much backward compatibility? Here's my belief:
Age of tools when distro is created: 6 months
Age of distro when installed: 4 months
Time between distro upgrades 24 months
-
Desireable backward compatibility:
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 21:53:25 +0100
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We are talking about Qt 4._1_ and that's quite a bit more than a year
> old. So this fits well into your concept of 'grace period'.
Mmmm... Sorry about that. Twice confused. I was convinced having read
somewhere that Ly
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 06:09:12PM -0200, John Coppens wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:54:54 +0100
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > reinstalled on a fresh partition but I still have problems. So among
> > > other things I am giving up on Lyx. More to the point, I am giving up
> >
On Thursday 21 February 2008 19:55:28 Steve Litt wrote:
> On my box, every make, whether successful or failure, takes about 25
> minutes, and ./configure takes 5 minutes. I'm not going to have time to do
> that for at least a couple weeks.
In such cases ccache is really useful. :-)
> The answer
On Thursday 21 February 2008 20:03:04 Steve Litt wrote:
> --with-version-suffix=1.5.3
You can simply use --with-version-suffix and configure will put the right
version for you. :-)
--
José Abílio
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:54:54 +0100
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > reinstalled on a fresh partition but I still have problems. So among
> > other things I am giving up on Lyx. More to the point, I am giving up
> > on recommending Lyx to TEX newbies. If someone can cite a version of
>
On Thursday 21 February 2008 12:20, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > After what I went through, I'd recommend that someone strongarm ALL
> > variables to the Qt4 values, and not leave anything to chance.
>
> What do you mean?
>
> JMarc
UIC4=/usr/lib/qt4/bin/
On Thursday 21 February 2008 11:48, José Matos wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 16:24:30 Steve Litt wrote:
> > So I'd add something like:
> >
> > WARNING!!! ALWAYS DELETE AND RESTORE YOUR LYX 1.5.3 SOURCE TREE AFTER A
> > BLOWN ./CONFIGURE OR MAKE!!!
> >
> > And then add a sentence saying why.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 04:48:43PM +, José Matos wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 16:24:30 Steve Litt wrote:
> > So I'd add something like:
> >
> > WARNING!!! ALWAYS DELETE AND RESTORE YOUR LYX 1.5.3 SOURCE TREE AFTER A
> > BLOWN ./CONFIGURE OR MAKE!!!
> >
> > And then add a sentence sayin
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:54:05PM +0100, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> LyX makes great use of C++ Standard Template Library (STL). This means
> that gcc users will have to install the relevant libstdc++ library to
> be able to compile this version of LyX.
I'd drop this paragraph. If at all it's the
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:27:25AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Thursday 21 February 2008 08:10, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "G. Milde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > 1. A Linux distribution might provide alternative means to QTDIR for
> > >specifying the qt4 dir.
> >
> > Actually, the
Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After what I went through, I'd recommend that someone strongarm ALL variables
> to the Qt4 values, and not leave anything to chance.
What do you mean?
JMarc
On Thursday 21 February 2008 07:47, Helge Hafting wrote:
> Steve Litt wrote:
> > Makes perfect sense to me, and I couldn't have said it better myself. A
> > person should not have to upgrade their distro every few months in order
> > to compile the latest apps.
>
> If you want to compile the very
On Thursday 21 February 2008 16:24:30 Steve Litt wrote:
> So I'd add something like:
>
> WARNING!!! ALWAYS DELETE AND RESTORE YOUR LYX 1.5.3 SOURCE TREE AFTER A
> BLOWN ./CONFIGURE OR MAKE!!!
>
> And then add a sentence saying why.
make clean is not enough?
I am asking although I suspect that the
On Thursday 21 February 2008 08:10, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> "G. Milde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 1. A Linux distribution might provide alternative means to QTDIR for
> >specifying the qt4 dir.
>
> Actually, the variable we use is QT4DIR.
>
> JMarc
That reminds me of one more thing:
On Thursday 21 February 2008 06:48, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > Deleting and re-extracting the source tree did the trick. So the steps to
> > cure the problem turned out to be:
>
> Good to hear.
>
> Steve, if you think that README & INSTALL files put you somewhere
> in the wrong direction, the best you
G. Milde wrote:
On 21.02.08, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Actually the INSTALL file has been cleaned up a lot for 1.5.4, see
attached.
May I propose a small patch for improved clarity?
Sure, thanks.
Abdel.
"G. Milde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. A Linux distribution might provide alternative means to QTDIR for
>specifying the qt4 dir.
Actually, the variable we use is QT4DIR.
JMarc
On 21.02.08, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Actually the INSTALL file has been cleaned up a lot for 1.5.4, see
> attached.
May I propose a small patch for improved clarity?
--- /home/m/INSTALL 2008-02-21 13:56:56.0 +0100
+++ /home/m/INSTALL.old 2008-02-21 13:58:20.0 +0100
@@ -13
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Deleting and re-extracting the source tree did the trick. So the steps to cure
the problem turned out to be:
Good to hear.
Steve, if you think that README & INSTALL files put you somewhere
in the wrong direction, the best you can do is to send us the corrections.
Actuall
> Deleting and re-extracting the source tree did the trick. So the steps to
> cure
> the problem turned out to be:
Good to hear.
Steve, if you think that README & INSTALL files put you somewhere
in the wrong direction, the best you can do is to send us the corrections.
Pavel
On Thursday 21 February 2008 06:43:12 Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> I've promised to keep out of this thread but this is again plain FUD,
> LyX-1.5 is perfectly compilable with Qt-4.1.0. The INSTALL file only
> says that it has been _tested_ with Qt-4.1.5. All version of Qt-4.1.x
> are course binary a
Steve Litt wrote:
In hindsight, I'm not going to disagree with you, always assuming it would
have taken extra work to leave xforms in. My concern was more with the choice
of 4.1.5 as a minimum rather than earlier 4.x (I actually got it working with
4.1.4).
I've promised to keep out of this t
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 17:45, Micha wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:39:12 +0100
>
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> So for example you applaud if microsoft decides that each and every
> > >> software they issue will be restricted t
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:39:12 +0100
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> So for example you applaud if microsoft decides that each and every
> >> software they issue will be restricted to run only on vista, right?
> >> Curiously, they do not do th
Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> So for example you applaud if microsoft decides that each and every
>> software they issue will be restricted to run only on vista, right?
>> Curiously, they do not do that.
>
> curiously, nothing runs properly on vista, including vista, and they keep
> implying
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 14:39:55 +0100
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In that case you need the 1.5 year old Lyx to match your 1.5 year old
> > distro, don't you?
>
> So for example you applaud if microsoft decides that each and every
> soft
On Wednesday 20 February 2008 08:40, you wrote:
> Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My one remaining problem is that the fonts on the menu, scrollbars and
> > dialog boxes are too small for me to read. I'll be looking up how to make
> > them larger in the next few days.
>
> Try to run qtco
Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My one remaining problem is that the fonts on the menu, scrollbars and dialog
> boxes are too small for me to read. I'll be looking up how to make them
> larger in the next few days.
Try to run qtconfig (the qt4 version of course).
JMarc
Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In that case you need the 1.5 year old Lyx to match your 1.5 year old distro,
> don't you?
So for example you applaud if microsoft decides that each and every
software they issue will be restricted to run only on vista, right?
Curiously, they do not do that.
J
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:16:36 -0500, Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
My one remaining problem is that the fonts on the menu, scrollbars and
dialog
boxes are too small for me to read. I'll be looking up how to make them
larger in the next few days.
Hi, Steve.
You might be able to get
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 01:22, you wrote:
> Nobody cautioned you yet in this thread. Delete the source tree and
> untar a fresh copy before re-setting the environment and re-running
> configure. Otherwise, same old mistakes just happen again and again.
>
> I did this recompile myself a few we
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 17:02:34 -0600
"Paul Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 19, 2008 1:38 PM, Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > > Steve Litt wrote:
> >
> > > > Interestingly, it appears that in order to upgrade to qt
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:38:57 -0500
Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > Steve Litt wrote:
>
> > > Interestingly, it appears that in order to upgrade to qt 2.2.3, I would
> > > need to upgrade my glibc (because of rtld(GNU_HASH)).
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 14:32:02 -0500
Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:07, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > JOHN CULLETON wrote:
> > > While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12
> > > system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail
deedee wrote:
The only other issue I'm aware of I believe someone already
mentioned. You have to make sure that the devel- files are the
same as the regular ones; just as some software that requires
kernel-headers to install from source, the kernel-headers have to
the same as the current kerne
Steve Litt wrote:
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Steve Litt wrote:
Then there's the fact that some of us have dialup, and some in rural
areas are years from getting broadband. The "just upgrade your qt"
suggestion could be a day's downloading over a phone line tha
Steve Litt wrote:
Yeah, that's the way to get LyX users -- tell em if they're not willing to
upgrade the very vitals of their OS so that the developers can use the latest
and greatest Qt instead of providing compatibility with a couple year old
version (Qt 4 came out summer 2005, but Qt 4.2 is
Steve Litt wrote:
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Steve Litt wrote:
Then there's the fact that some of us have dialup, and some in rural
areas are years from getting broadband. The "just upgrade your qt"
suggestion could be a day's downloading over a phone line tha
> > > While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12
> > > system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail. I
> > > reinstalled on a fresh partition but I still have problems. So among
> > > other things I am giving up on Lyx. More to the point, I am giving up
> > >
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Steve Litt wrote:
> > Then there's the fact that some of us have dialup, and some in rural
> > areas are years from getting broadband. The "just upgrade your qt"
> > suggestion could be a day's downloading over a phone line that could g
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:07, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> JOHN CULLETON wrote:
> > While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12
> > system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail. I
> > reinstalled on a fresh partition but I still have problems. So among
> > o
On Feb 19, 2008 1:38 PM, Steve Litt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> > Steve Litt wrote:
>
> > > Interestingly, it appears that in order to upgrade to qt 2.2.3, I would
> > > need to upgrade my glibc (because of rtld(GNU_HASH)). I'm sorry, b
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 02:01, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Steve Litt wrote:
> > Interestingly, it appears that in order to upgrade to qt 2.2.3, I would
> > need to upgrade my glibc (because of rtld(GNU_HASH)). I'm sorry, but
> > that's just too much to expect from a user.
>
> No offense intend
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 11:38 am, Paul Johnson wrote:
> My recollection is that Mandriva is an RPM based system that
> branched out of Mandrake, which began as a simple re-packaging
> of RedHat linux with "optimized" packages for i586 and i686. I
> see nothing in their pages to make me think I'
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 02:59:04PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Thanks very much Paul,
>
> I have no time today, but tomorrow or the next day I'll delete the LyX source
> tree, re-extract the tarball, and try again now that libqt4-devel is
> installed.
>
> One thing I cannot do is upgrade from Qt
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:38:31PM -0600, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Oh, please. The suspense is killing me. Did Steve succeed in
> building the LyX he wants?
>
> If not, lets help him do it. The troubles that were posted early on
> were common errors in configure/make stages of building software.
Thanks very much Paul,
I have no time today, but tomorrow or the next day I'll delete the LyX source
tree, re-extract the tarball, and try again now that libqt4-devel is
installed.
One thing I cannot do is upgrade from Qt-4.1.4 to Qt-4.2.3. I'm concerned
about the stability of my system as a w
Oh, please. The suspense is killing me. Did Steve succeed in
building the LyX he wants?
If not, lets help him do it. The troubles that were posted early on
were common errors in configure/make stages of building software.
My recollection is that Mandriva is an RPM based system that branched
ou
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 10:22:38AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No offense intended Steve but you are obviously confused with version
> > numbers etc. I even suspect that you didn't even fully read the README
> > and INSTALL that come wit
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:54:26AM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> erm, this is the second time you mention qt 2.x.y, i previsouly
> thought its just typo and i wonder - on my distro there are only qt
> 3.3.8 and qt 4.3.2 available. you really mean 'upgrade to 2.2.3' ? -
> this seems to be some messag
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 07:41:49PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Then there's the fact that some of us have dialup, and some in rural
> areas are years from getting broadband. The "just upgrade your qt"
> suggestion could be a day's downloading over a phone line that could
> go down any time.
I've be
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 03:27:28PM -0800, JOHN CULLETON wrote:
> While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12
> system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail.
Surely Qt ate your outgoing mail.
There's no way that this could be case of PEBKAC.
Earth is flat, pi
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 05:54:30PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> UIC=/usr/lib/qt4/bin/uic ./configure --with-extra-prefix=/usr/lib/qt4
> --with-qt4-dir=/usr/lib/qt4 --with-qt4-includes=/usr/lib/qt4/include
> --with-qt4-libraries=/usr/lib/qt4/lib
There's btw no reason to actuall _install_ Qt, runnin
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 05:38:49PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Monday 18 February 2008 17:07, Rich Shepard wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > > To answer your Subject line:
> > >
> > > xforms has not been maintained in around four years.
> >
> >And, it was plain ugly. :
Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> He wants a nice new Ferrari and still fuel it with leaded fuel, it
> doesn't work that way.
It is just a matter of having a program that works well and where
issues get fixed. If today somebody comes and ask for a bugfix to LyX
1.37, I do not think it would be
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:22:38 +0100
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No offense intended Steve but you are obviously confused with version
> > numbers etc. I even suspect that you didn't even fully read the README
> > and INSTALL
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In the case of Steve, his problem was clearly something he could have
resolved by himself without questioning our choice of development
tool.
Well, anybody can at least question our choices. This does not mean
that we
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> But now I want to upgrade LyX without installing a newer operating system.
>> I don't think that's too much to ask.
>>
> Lyx 1.5.3 is in the repository main/testing current of Mandriva.
This is for people using Mandriva 2008. Some people use older
versions...
JMarc
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In the case of Steve, his problem was clearly something he could have
> resolved by himself without questioning our choice of development
> tool.
Well, anybody can at least question our choices. This does not mean
that we shall not stand by them, b
> But now I want to upgrade LyX without installing a newer operating system.
> I don't think that's too much to ask.
>
According to this :
http://sophie.zarb.org/rpmfind?mversion=community&mversion=cooker&mversion=current&search=lyx&st=rpmname&submit=Soumettre&qcount=20
Lyx 1.5.3 is in the repos
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
No offense intended Steve but you are obviously confused with version
numbers etc. I even suspect that you didn't even fully read the README
and INSTALL that come with the source. As an end-user, either you wait
for your
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No offense intended Steve but you are obviously confused with version
> numbers etc. I even suspect that you didn't even fully read the README
> and INSTALL that come with the source. As an end-user, either you wait
> for your distro to come with a b
John McCabe-Dansted wrote:
On Feb 19, 2008 4:07 PM, Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
JOHN CULLETON wrote:
on recommending Lyx to TEX newbies. If someone can cite a version of
Lyx that runs without tears on the latest stable version of Slack
(12) then I may give it a try again.
1.3
On Feb 19, 2008 4:07 PM, Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> JOHN CULLETON wrote:
> > on recommending Lyx to TEX newbies. If someone can cite a version of
> > Lyx that runs without tears on the latest stable version of Slack
> > (12) then I may give it a try again.
1.3.7?
Being able to
JOHN CULLETON wrote:
While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12
system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail. I
reinstalled on a fresh partition but I still have problems. So among
other things I am giving up on Lyx. More to the point, I am giving up
on reco
Steve Litt wrote:
On Monday 18 February 2008 18:01, Pavel Sanda wrote:
It shouldn't be this difficult to compile LyX. It wasn't this difficult a
couple years ago.
actually this should be the job of your distro maintainers, not lyx.
I've been hearing a lot of that type of comment lately, and
Nobody cautioned you yet in this thread. Delete the source tree and
untar a fresh copy before re-setting the environment and re-running
configure. Otherwise, same old mistakes just happen again and again.
I did this recompile myself a few weeks ago on Scientific Linux and I
ended up setting QTDI
On Monday 18 February 2008 19:54, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > But now I want to upgrade LyX without installing a newer operating
> > system. I don't think that's too much to ask.
> >
> > One could counter that if I used Debian I could just apt-get install the
> > whole thing. Well I don't use Debian --
> But now I want to upgrade LyX without installing a newer operating system. I
> don't think that's too much to ask.
>
> One could counter that if I used Debian I could just apt-get install the
> whole
> thing. Well I don't use Debian -- I like Mandriva and have been using it
> since 2000, and
> On Monday 18 February 2008 18:26, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > > > --with-extra-prefix=/usr/lib/qt4 but change the path accordingly.
> > >
> > > I don't understand what you mean.
> >
> > where do you have libraries of qt4 now ?
>
> Depending on the meaning of the question, either /usr/lib/qt4
> or /u
On Monday 18 February 2008 18:01, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > It shouldn't be this difficult to compile LyX. It wasn't this difficult a
> > couple years ago.
>
> actually this should be the job of your distro maintainers, not lyx.
I've been hearing a lot of that type of comment lately, and I think it'
On Monday 18 February 2008 18:26, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> > > --with-extra-prefix=/usr/lib/qt4 but change the path accordingly.
> >
> > I don't understand what you mean.
>
> where do you have libraries of qt4 now ?
Depending on the meaning of the question, either /usr/lib/qt4
or /usr/lib/qt4/lib.
S
JOHN CULLETON wrote:
> While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12
> system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail. I reinstalled
> on a fresh partition but I still have problems. So among other things I am
> giving up on Lyx. More to the point, I am giving up
JOHN CULLETON wrote:
While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12 system I managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail. I reinstalled on a fresh partition but I still have problems.
If so, then it wouldn't seem Qt4 (or any of these other things) are
responsible. Yo
>If someone can cite a version of Lyx that runs without tears on the latest
>stable version of Slack (12) then I may give it a try again.
i see some slackware package for 1.4.4 in wiki.
pavel
While in the process of trying to add things like Qt4 to my Slack 12 system I
managed to mung my ability to send outgoing mail. I reinstalled on a fresh
partition but I still have problems. So among other things I am giving up on
Lyx. More to the point, I am giving up on recommending Lyx to TEX
> > --with-extra-prefix=/usr/lib/qt4 but change the path accordingly.
> I don't understand what you mean.
where do you have libraries of qt4 now ?
pavel
On Monday 18 February 2008 18:01, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Hi Pavel,
> if you havent install it globally you cant use
I don't understand what you mean. What do I need to install globally to use
it? How does one install it globally?
> --with-extra-prefix=/usr/lib/qt4 but change the path accordingly.
> And it errors out like this:
>
> deps/Dialogs.Tpo -c Dialogs.cpp -o Dialogs.o
> QAbout.h:24: error: ???Ui??? has not been declared
> QAbout.h:24: error: expected `{' before ???QAboutUi???
> QAbout.h:24: error: invalid function declaration
> make[7]: *** [Dialogs.lo] Error 1
> make[7]: Leaving di
On Monday 18 February 2008 16:58, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> To answer your Subject line:
>
> xforms has not been maintained in around four years.
>
> Qt4 gives more possibility to use on non-Unix and even non-X11 systems.
>
> Qt4 has better support for internationalization and many other user
> inter
On Monday 18 February 2008 17:07, Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > To answer your Subject line:
> >
> > xforms has not been maintained in around four years.
>
>And, it was plain ugly. :-)
Better ugly than uncompileable.
SteveT
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 04:39:20PM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Well, after 2 hours I got libqt4-devel loaded, and a 30 minute make ended
> like
> this:
>
> make all-recursive
> make[6]: Entering directory `/home/slitt/junk/lyx-1.5.3/src/frontends/qt4'
> Making all in ui
> make[7]: E
Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Qt4 has better support for internationalization and many other user
> interface features. This lets LyX developers work on LyX specific
> features.
most notably, it had no support for unicode. The important and overdue switch
to unicode in 1.5 would not have been possible
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
To answer your Subject line:
xforms has not been maintained in around four years.
And, it was plain ugly. :-)
Rich
--
Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D. | IntegrityCredibility
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc.|
To answer your Subject line:
xforms has not been maintained in around four years.
Qt4 gives more possibility to use on non-Unix and even non-X11 systems.
Qt4 has better support for internationalization and many other user
interface features. This lets LyX developers work on LyX specific
featur
Hi all,
Well, after 2 hours I got libqt4-devel loaded, and a 30 minute make ended like
this:
make all-recursive
make[6]: Entering directory `/home/slitt/junk/lyx-1.5.3/src/frontends/qt4'
Making all in ui
make[7]: Entering directory `/home/slitt/junk/lyx-1.5.3/src/frontends/qt4/ui'
/usr/lib/qt3/
95 matches
Mail list logo
