On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, Fitz wrote:
> After wasting a day of my life (now thats a user friendly platform), trying 4
>versions of QT
> and 6 versions (!) of LICQ I found one that worked, It was ver 0.72
> RH6.1 found on an obscure server, compiled by some anonymous genius.
As a developer of Licq, I wish to know what you were doing to have
problems? Have you compiled any source code for Linux?
Licq is beta, if you want it, you have to work for it. Don't expect it to
be straight forward. If you have problems installing it, let us know and
we will help you, that's what the Licq support list is for. You don't go
behind people's backs to blame them for nothing you have helped with.
This is entirely against Linux philosophies.
> This one problem is what keeping people from converting to Linux. The fact that
>nothing is ever
> straight forward.
Things are straight forward if you look in a forward direction.
> But if Linux is ever going to snare the Home or Small Bus masses, it needs more than
>a cool
> ripple effect on the desktop and the admiation of your peers.
Linux's aim is not to snare the Home or Small Business masses. If it
does, good for it. It's to allow people to enlighten and better
themselves through mutual understanding and co-operation. I honestly hope
people who think that it should be the best thing since sliced bread
should go use Microsoft software until they die and be paying Bill Gates
for that last slice of bread, because that's all they deserve.
> Stuffing around with ln -s /usr/lib/licq /usr/local/lib/licq, and LD_LIBRARY_PATH in
>some
> obscure conf file is killing Linux.
make install automatically does ldconfig -n /usr/local/lib/licq
I can't remember having touched LD_LIBRARY_PATH or ln -s for over a year.
Andrew.
--
SecretSydneyNet - A project to bring the community together
through new technologies. http://www.secret.com.au/sydney/
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List - http://www.slug.org.au
To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
unsubscribe in the text
