This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-xfree
mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.
Re: compiling flpsed under Cygwin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com>
To: <cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 1:37 PM
Subject: Re: compiling flpsed under Cygwin
On Wed, Jul 20, 2005 at 12:02:55PM -0700, Stephen P. Harris wrote:
I did not ask for your opinion on matters that did not have a direct
bearing on the compilation of flsped. Nor do I value anyone's
speculative opinion who has not compiled flpsed, and you especially
since you are inattentive to detail. I'm being polite; however I have
no confidence that a word to the wise will be sufficient. You come
across as a college kid.
Actually, sorry but you are not being polite.
Polite is relative to what I thought about saying.
You are not providing enough details to debug your problem so any
attempts to help you are going to be purely speculative.
Oh, really? I don't agree. You have provided them.
The details you have provided are
To take these in order:
0. Cygwin/Windows do not use .so files. Windows uses dlls. xorg-devel
distributes
a libX11.dll.a file which should have been found by the configure
script.
The fact that it was not found suggests that you have not installed the
xorg-devel
package. Hence Brian's suggestion and his lament that if you'd provided
the details requested at http://cygwin.com/problems we'd know just what
you do or don't have installed.
I know that some Linux apps will install on Windows/Cygwin and
others will not. I made the purpose of my email clear early on:
"Has anyone made progress with compiling flpsed?"
1. If you are truly using XFree86 then you're off-topic for this mailing
list. We don't support XFree86 anymore.
That may be, but how am I to know that? The FAQ says:
"Almost anything related to Cygwin is on-topic here. Please note,
that this is not a mailing list for the discussion of general Windows
topics. There are many many other places for that on the Internet.
Also note, that if you are interested in the Cygwin XFree86 project
which is porting the XFree86 code to Windows, then the correct
mailing list for this discussion is cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com. "
SH: So change the FAQ and the name of the mailing list. Why is
your sayso tobe considered authoritative and the FAQ dismissed?
2. If you have somehow managed to install both XFree86 and Xorg
on the same system, then you are, again, on your own as far as
> configuration problems go.
Are you implying that flpsed is not compiling because there
is a configuration problem generated by a conflict between
X servers? But I stated that I had installed all X11 packages.
That indicates the problem is caused by
"0. Cygwin/Windows do not use .so files. Windows uses dlls.
xorg-devel distributes a libX11.dll.a file which should have been
found by the configure script."
SH: You people have been beating on a dead strawhorse argument
by harping on whether I use Xfree or Xorg. That choice has not
prevented other Linux originated programs (Xemacs) from
compiling on my computer so it points to the libX11.dll.a answer.
3. I doubt that anyone knows what "the compatibility file" is.
I didn't identify it as an 'X11 compatibility file' I suppose that
requires a tremendous leap of insight when taken in the context
of mentioning I have all the X11 packages. Not _obsolete
"Category X11 XFree86-lib-compat: Cygwin/X 4.2.0 shared libraries."
That doesn't mean that package is needed, but that it eliminates not
having some particular resource when troubleshooting. The package
is found under View when setup displays the available list of packages.
4. Assuming that a linux shared library will work on Windows demonstrates
that
you should not be casting aspersions on people who are trying to help
you
because you obviously need a lot of help.
Go fyitaysp. Now do you the difference between restraining
myself to politeness and saying what I think?? I see people like
Brian all the time on WinXP.general. Somebody will post a
problem and a half-baked expert will respond with a wrong
solution because they don't know what the actual problem is.
The type that always wants to ask a question when they don't
know what the answer is.
I did not assume flpsed would work. I considered it possible,
ditto "Has anyone made progress with compiling flpsed?"
Since flpsed is a gem of a program if someone managed to
compile under Cygwin, or modified the code sufficiently,
then my remark would have elicited a response.
5. Ditto.
Don't you or any of your ilk waste my time any more,
I'm afraid that I probably qualify as being of Brian's "ilk" so you
probably think your time is being wasted by this message but I suspect
that the legion of flpsed-capable people waiting in the wings to help
you must have better things to do with their time than give you the
detailed instructions you are apparently expecting.
You are correct to fear that. But unlike Brian you provided one good
piece of information which was relevant to the error message about
libX11.so that I provided, explaining it. The rest of your post is dismal:
1) You display either ignorance of the FAQ or presume that others
should regard your interpretation of the FAQ as superior to that doc.
It is one thing to state that Xfree has been deprecated and another to
claim that Xfree is off-topic. Why don't you demand that whoever is
in charge of putting the files (such as LyX) into the list of available
downloads remove all reference to Xfree? It seems inconsistent to me
that a mailing list should refuse to discuss a package which is provided
in the download setup of Cygwin, whether or not it is _obsolete.
2) There you go creating a strawman argument. I made no report
of evidence establishing a configuration conflict between Xfree and
Xorg impacting the compilation of flpsed. The choice of X servers
certainly appears to be superflous to compiling flpsed.
3) Sombody must be in charge of putting files on the download
list. So I presume there is at least one person besides me who
would recognize what the the term "compatility file" refers to
when used in the context of X11 library package files. To me,
your statement demonstrates your personal lack of knowledge.
So, that just leaves people like Brian who try to help by first getting
you into a known state and then trying to help figure out what is going
on from general principles. When I have a problem, I usually expect
that no one is going to have my exact setup and hope that someone might
try to help me figure things out. I find someones of that sort of "ilk"
relatively rare and I'm usually rather grateful for their help.
Brian's help should have consisted of remarking, as you did in 0)
that the error message about libX11.so meant that flpsed was not
going to compile. His entire post, though meant as well-intended
help was a waste of time. Your points are 1,2,3... are mostly garbage;
(let me politely rephrase that) _erroneous_ with the exception of 0).
Your persistence seems worthy, but your discrimination falls short.
"When I have a problem, I usually expect that no one is going to have my
exact setup and hope that someone mighttry to help me figure things out."
SH: Your statement does not preclude a package like preview-latex from
compiling on 99% of Windows/Cygwin machines and zero reports of
flspsed installing on even one Windows/Cygwin. Not even one which
says, 'I got it to work but I'm not gonna tell you because you are a
cranky curmudgeon!' The relevant general principle is .dll vs. .so
not X Server, the battle of titans, Xfree or Xorg.
So your argument is specious. This particular issue is not at the
categorical level wherein your advice applies. The problem of the
so error message jumped out at you. It didn't need a first-level tier
help script approach used by technicians of limited experience.
Also I didn't know .so files were forbidden to Cygwin since my
Apache directory is full of them, installed by Cygwin. So from 0)
your statement "Cygwin/Windows do not use .so files" seems
less than precise, certainly makes it hard for me to generalize to
"xorg-devel distributes a libX11.dll.a file which should have been
found by the configure script." I suppose you mean in place of the
-lx11 reference to libX11.so which seems accurate. From Google:
"Hallo,
Cygwin changed the naming scheme for X binaries and importlibraries,
this means the X11 is not found by configure without this change:
diff -Nurd ocaml-3.07beta2~/configure ocaml-3.07beta2/configure
--- ocaml-3.07beta2~/configure 2003-08-20 17:10:58.000000000 +0200
+++ ocaml-3.07beta2/configure 2003-08-29 15:23:24.000000000 +0200
@@ -1194,6 +1194,7 @@
do
if test -f $dir/libX11.a || \
test -f $dir/libX11.so || \
+ test -f $dir/libX11.dll.a || \
test -f $dir/libX11.sa; then
if test $dir = /usr/lib; then
x11_link="-lX11"
#END
Besides this it builds clean. Are there testsuites available to test the
different generated executables for regression? Gerrit "
Apparently, YMMV.
cgf
1. "If you are truly using XFree86 then you're off-topic for this mailing
list. "We don't support XFree86 anymore." Unless you are in charge of this
list with the power of refuting the FAQ the use of "we" seems yet another
case of the "we" consisting of an X-man with a mouse in his pocket. People
with little qualification habitually use the term "we" to hide their
inexperience. It advertises their feeling of being on insecure ground.
I will be moving on, Stephen