./configure variations

[ulrich steffens]

Am Dienstag, den 08.11.2005, 10:04 -0800 schrieb Vram:
> On Tue, 2005-11-08 at 12:55 -0500, Zach wrote:
> > configure scripts are unique to the source code that they come with. 
> > As such there's no way to document how to make them work in any
> > general, yet useful way.
> > 
> > If  you untarred the source, and the README says to run the configure
> > script, yet the configure script isn't working, then it is broken.  I
> > know this seems obvious, but my point is that there's no documentation
> > that will tell you what your'e doing wrong, because you aren't doing
> > anything wrong.  It's just broken.
> > 
> > If this is the case, then fixing it requires some understanding of
> > shell scripts, so that you can look at the output to see where it's
> > failing then edit the configure script to fix the broken part.
> > 
> > Here are a couple of suggestions.
> > 
> > Post the output from the configure script to the list, and maybe
> > somebody can make sense of where it's breaking.
> > 
> > See if somebody has packaged the program you want already by googling
> > for "<program name> deb", or "<program name> rpm".  If you find an rpm
> > of the program you need you might be able to use alien to convert it
> > to a deb.
> > 
> > If you do get the program to compile, consider using the
> > "checkinstall" utility, in place of the "make install" step.  This
> > will generate a package that can then be easily installed or removed. 
> > Read up on checkinstall first.  Installing stuff from source is a sure
> > way to wind up with an unmaintainable system.
> > 
> > On 11/8/05, alex <radsky at ncia.net> wrote:
> > > August Karlstrom wrote:
> > >
> > > > Matt Galvin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> In most cases the software you are looking for is probably already
> > > >> availible in Ubuntu without having to compile anything.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yes, but my impression is that the available precompiled versions
> > > > quite often are not up to date (sometimes *very* out of date, like
> > > > several years).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > August
> > > >
> > > Yes, this is why I was trying to install Prozilla-2.0-CVS-19-2005 via
> > > the tarball route. I wasn't able to find it any other way.
> > >
> > > alex
> 
> 
> I just did an 
> 
> apt-cache search prozilla  and got a hit...
> 
> What's wrong with that one..
> 
> TIA
> 
> Vram
> 
then you may be using some extra-repos, cause with standard
main/universe/multiverse there is NO prozilla.

ulrich