Re: Getting CVS to compile

[Joel Biddier]

Bernhard Reiter wrote:

> Hi Joel,
> it should be possible to get you a development version running.  ;)
>
>  
Tell me about it. I am coming down to the logic:

“If I'm am the only one with the problem ... ”

The process of elimination can produce painful self reflecting results :-).

I think the fact that I ran an older development version with no effort 
and I wanted a quick fix when the air of effort seemed to loom over me 
(being my free time is getting shorter these days) was the impetus for 
my confusion and hastiness for a solution. Sorry.

> I suggest building pygtk from source and install it locally:
> http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/pygtk/2.2/
> should have the one that runs with gtk-2.2.
>
> Hey you can even get a recent stable gtk-2.4 (aka GTK+ 2.4.13)
> and build it locally (using --prefix=/your/favourite/directoy with configure)
> and then fetch pygtk-2.4.1.
>
> For developing application it usually makes some sense to just
> build the stuff from source to not run into any errors with old 
> version that your distribution might have.
>
>  
Yes, I do that myself with my production and development boxes. But, I 
do not want to develop the new code yet. I just wanted to look over the 
code (maybe tinker with it) and run the application to get a feel of 
what is going on. And then pester everyone who *is* developing with a 
wish list or a request ;-). Hence, I did not wanted to compile new libs 
on my development boxes. When it comes to my development boxes, I am 
very particular – if I don't use it, I don't want it in there (it keeps 
things stable). I don't even network those boxes in fear of crakers 
screwing something up (yes, I'm paranoid too ;-) ). So until I actually 
do serious development on the new code, I will most likely not put more 
stuff on my development boxes.

As for the Linux boxes, I am more carefree. But, I am currently using 
them for my documentation. I do not what to make the boxes exceptional 
(they should be a rather standard installation. This ensures that I 
don't get results that only work for me. I'm trying to do Linux 
installations that are very passive – user adds mostly what is supported 
by OS vendor. Like using the SuSE's Python imaging lib for PIL on a SuSE 
box and not a "get it off the web rpm", etc...). I have a limited many 
machines to work with. I am already thinking I will need to have some 
boxes with several boots, so I can have access to clean installations of 
different OSs (or versions of an OS) for documentation. This will take 
time :-(. I'll look at getting the pygtk-2.4.1 in the mean time. That 
should not have an impact on the system's state.

I'll just need to resolve this on my own time (which is getting tight 
these days). So it may take me some time to catch up with the rest you. 
(not to imply that I was on the ball in the first place ;-) )

Thanks.

--J