On Sunday 09 May 2004 18:56, David L Norris wrote: >On Sun, 2004-05-09 at 09:11, Gene Heskett wrote: >> I just got done with finally fixing pango to run correctly, by >> hand generating a .pangorc file in my root dir. This has >> apparently been the problem all along & I refused to believe it >> could be the real problem because there are no .pangorc files in >> either of the pango-1.2 rpms. > >I have no such .pangorc files and I frequently build GTK apps which > rely on Pango which work perfectly. From your posts it looks like > you are trying to build custom versions of core desktop components > like GTK+, Pango, etc. One of the messages complaining about pango > shows configure looking for Pango in the > /usr/local/include/pango-1.0 directory. Fedora Core puts nothing > but empty directories in /usr/local. Maybe you're running one of > your 3 custom copies of pkg-config. > >Pango cflags from an unmodified FC1 installation: >$ pkg-config pango --cflags >-I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 >-I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include > > >In that same message you're trying to build GTK+ using checkinstall. >That will almost certainly break every prebuilt FC1 RPM which needs > GTK+ and its various components. And you're apparently building > RPMs as root which is bound to utterly demolish your system sooner > than later. > >My suggestion would be to write good spec files (or even moderately > bad ones) by hand and dump checkinstall. Especially if you plan to > replace vital system components. Or, better, fix the software to > work with your system instead of breaking your system to work with > the software. > >> This has been very frustrating to me for the last month. Either >> the installer should see to it this file is generated by whatever >> means is normally used to generate it, or it should be included in >> the rpm distributions. > >.pangorc isn't needed unless you're trying to make Pango look > somewhere other than the default location. Which implies you've > built your own custom Pango which looks in the wrong place. (e.g. > clean out /etc/ld.so.conf, unset LD_LIBRARY_PATH, fix PATH, etc) The point being that I did make the modules and alias files, then copied them to every place the error messages said it was looking. None of that helped until I made a .pangorc, according to the manpages. Now if it will work with .pangorc specifying the the default path it asked for, whyinhell won't it work without the .pangorc? I thought it was a good question. IMO, the system is broken if when an error is discovered, and the original rpms are re-installed, in this case many many times, without ANY visible effect on the problem. Fix the rpms to actually put a working install back into the system, regardless of how fucked up the user might have made his system. You are accusing me of having tarball built stuff, and thats true. But, building the damned atk/pango/glib tarballs didn't screw up my system, that failed build was a week later and I never did get gtk+-2.4 to configure. Everything was working quite nicely UNTIL I tried to build, according to their directions, the X11R6.7 from x.orgs downloads the next day after the release announcment. That, FWIW did configure, but it didn't 'make' to completion, so theoreticly nothing was installed. But my system was hopelessly fubared from that point on. The failed attempt to build gtk+-2.4 and all its dependencies which does include pango, was an attempt to bring the system back to life gtk wise, was 2 weeks after the system gtk & pango stuffs died, and is not, IMO, connected in any way to the original failure from 3 weeks prior. I've cleaned house in my various pkgconfig dirs until the only thing left is the installed rpms. Didn't fix it. I ran pango-querymodules >pango.modules and put it where the error said it wasn't. Didn't fix it. Re-install ALL the rpms, several times, didn't fix it. Upgraded from RH8.0 to FC1, didn't fix it. Like I said, the rpms need fixing so that they actually do install a fully working system. Without a .pangorc, that simply wasn't possible. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) 99.22% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message by Gene Heskett are: Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.
