[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Building Lynx2-8-4 - when did complicated/undebuggable "con
From: |
Thomas E. Dickey |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev Building Lynx2-8-4 - when did complicated/undebuggable "configure" scripts become the norm? |
Date: |
Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:26:24 -0500 (EST) |
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Malcolm Boekhoff wrote:
> The question asked by this posting is: "Why isn't Lynx linking?".
>
> I am trying to build Lynx on NT4 with Cygwin (using bash), but, as usual when
> things don't go quite right, I need to find out which
> one of the 200 command-line "configure" arguments I need.
>
> Why can't we have just have a makefile instead of having to create the
> makefile from a 16000 line shell script that is pretty much
> un-debuggable?
if you really do understand makefiles, constructing one manually from
makefile.in is not a big deal. unfortunately this is not the case
for most people. (the makefile before the configure script had
roughly 50 platform/library combinations, and about half did not
really build).
>
> I am using the following command:
>
> configure --build=CYGWIN --target=WIN32 --with-screen=ncurses --with-zlib
> --disable-full-paths --with-ssl --enable-externs; make
>
> but when it gets to the linking phase, it moans about things like "stdscr"
> and "LINES" not being defined (these are defined in
> libncurses.a).
did you build your own libncurses? (I'm aware that the cygwin people are
tinkering with shared libraries, but haven't seen it working - I've built
on cygwin statically only).
--
T.E.Dickey <address@hidden>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden
Re: lynx-dev Building Lynx2-8-4 - when did complicated/undebuggable "configure" scripts become the norm?, Doug Kaufman, 2001/02/27