From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-12 00:00:32
|
Hi all, 2 short questions for you: 1) I am missing autoconf in Msys / Mingw installation. I have read in some internet postings that autoconf is a part of autotools package... only I appear to be unable to find such a package :-) any ideas where it is? 2) Also, I was wodering as to why Msys does not, by default, have bash - I have installed Msys 1.0.10 and, by default, Ffmpeg refuses to build because it senses that there is no bash present. Having installed bash separately (i.e. as a separate package) the problem was solved... but I was just wondering as to why bash was not a part of default install in MinSYS... |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-12 00:05:05
|
On 3/12/07, leon zadorin <leo...@gm...> wrote: > Hi all, 2 short questions for you: > > 1) I am missing autoconf in Msys / Mingw installation. I have read in > some internet postings that autoconf is a part of autotools package... > only I appear to be unable to find such a package :-) any ideas where > it is? well, have answered my own question here... from http://www.mingw.org/download.shtml : "If you need autoconf, automake, libtool, cvs, etc. you will want to also install the msysDTK package" sorry for wasting everyone's time ... |
From: Greg C. <chi...@co...> - 2007-03-12 00:14:27
|
On 2007-3-12 0:00 UTC, leon zadorin wrote: > > 2) Also, I was wodering as to why Msys does not, by default, have bash > - I have installed Msys 1.0.10 Click on the MSYS icon. Doesn't 'bash' come up? |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-12 00:18:27
|
On 3/12/07, Greg Chicares <chi...@co...> wrote: > On 2007-3-12 0:00 UTC, leon zadorin wrote: > > > > 2) Also, I was wodering as to why Msys does not, by default, have bash > > - I have installed Msys 1.0.10 > > Click on the MSYS icon. Doesn't 'bash' come up? > rxvt comes up where if I type SET one of the outputs generated is SHELL=/bin/sh and also BASH=/bin/sh also, from memory (I shall repeat the whole install "from scratch" to make sure ASAP), there was no bash.exe at all after the default install of MinSYS... |
From: Benjamin S. <ben...@sm...> - 2007-03-12 00:29:05
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 leon zadorin wrote: > rxvt comes up where if I type SET one of the outputs generated is > SHELL=/bin/sh > and also > BASH=/bin/sh Yes, sh.exe is bash. Do you mean you need /bin/bash to exist? You could just copy sh.exe to bash.exe - --BDS -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF9J7NSSwGp5sTYNkRAhLtAJ9bLCBinSh1bO7eMzxZ9RXKtTKA1QCgtVKd Rn8/MTHWrRr2jKYs6OhXWPA= =Pg4y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-12 00:21:05
|
On 3/12/07, leon zadorin <leo...@gm...> wrote: > well, have answered my own question here... from > http://www.mingw.org/download.shtml : > "If you need autoconf, automake, libtool, cvs, etc. you will want to > also install the msysDTK package" > sorry for wasting everyone's time ... Hmmm, but now, after installing the DTK from: http://prdownloads.sf.net/mingw/msysDTK-1.0.1.exe?download I get the following error when running "autoconf -f" from one of my projects: " Can't locate Autom4te/General.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /usr/share/autoconf /usr/lib/perl5/5.6.1/msys /usr/lib/perl5/5.6.1 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1/msys /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.1 /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl .) at /usr/bin/autom4te line 40. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/bin/autom4te line 40. " Any ideas please? |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-12 00:41:56
|
On 3/12/07, leon zadorin <leo...@gm...> wrote: > Hmmm, but now, after installing the DTK from: > http://prdownloads.sf.net/mingw/msysDTK-1.0.1.exe?download my bad, I had installed 1.0.0 instlead of 1.0.1 :-) ooops :-) but, havig installed the following (in the order mentioned) mingw 5.1.3 minsys 1.0.10 DTK 1.0.1 there are still errors when I am running "autoconf -f" : "Can't locate object method "path" via package "Autom4te::Request" (perhaps you forgot to load "Autom4te::Request"?) at /usr/bin/autom4te line 81." must be something else that I am doing wrong... time for a coffee i think... |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-12 00:49:53
|
On 3/12/07, leon zadorin <leo...@gm...> wrote: > there are still errors when I am running "autoconf -f" : > > "Can't locate object method "path" via package "Autom4te::Request" > (perhaps you forgot to load "Autom4te::Request"?) at /usr/bin/autom4te > line 81." > > must be something else that I am doing wrong... time for a coffee i think... Ha! As per http://www.arcknowledge.com/gmane.comp.sysutils.autoconf.general/2004-06/msg00028.html "That can happen if you have a stale cache (ie. generated by an older version)" ... consequently: rm -fR ./autom4te.cache and then autoconf -f works fine :-) Thanks to everyone for their prompt and informative replies! Kind regards Leon Zadorin. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-03-12 10:27:11
|
Quoting Leon Zadorin (LZ), Greg Chicares (GC) and Benjamin Smedburg (BS): LZ> I was wo[n]dering as to why Msys does not, by default, have LZ> bash - I have installed Msys 1.0.10 and, by default, Ffmpeg LZ> refuses to build because it senses that there is no bash LZ> present. LZ> Having installed bash separately (i.e. as a separate package) LZ> the problem was solved... but I was just wondering as to why LZ> bash was not a part of default install in MinSYS... I'm wondering why it is that so many people insist on calling MSYS `MinSYS'? AFAIK, there is no such product as MinSYS; if there is, it has nothing to do with MSYS, (which is correctly spelled in all upper case letters). But, that aside... MSYS *does* provide bash, and always has done; it just calls it sh.exe, because that is what configure scripts are *supposed* to require. I consider it a bug in Ffmpeg, if its configure script requires anything beyond a basic Bourne shell. GC> Click on the MSYS icon. Doesn't 'bash' come up? LZ> rxvt comes up where if I type SET one of the outputs generated LZ> is LZ> SHELL=/bin/sh LZ> and also LZ> BASH=/bin/sh And, within that rxvt, you *are* running bash, aliased to /bin/sh; rxvt isn't a shell, (command line interpreter); it's an emulated X-term, providing the window infrastructure in which the shell is invoked; that shell *is* bash, but it is provided as /bin/sh.exe. LZ> also, from memory (I shall repeat the whole install "from LZ> scratch" to make sure ASAP), there was no bash.exe at all after LZ> the default install of MinSYS... And you still won't find bash.exe; in the spirit of our minimalist project goals, we install only one shell, sh.exe, but... BS> Yes, sh.exe is bash. Do you mean you need /bin/bash to exist? BS> You could just copy sh.exe to bash.exe Or, if you are using an NTFS file system, (usual for Win2K, XP): $ (cd /bin && ln sh.exe bash.exe) so you create a *hard* link, which works just as well, without creating an extra copy of the file. Regards, Keith. |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-13 00:06:32
|
On 3/12/07, Keith MARSHALL <kei...@to...> wrote: > I'm wondering why it is that so many people insist on calling > MSYS `MinSYS'? may be because it makes more sense, is more natural and intuitive: MinGW, MinGWiki, MinSYS... (Minimal(ist) => Min) so consider it a bug in your naming convention. But, that aside... > GC> Click on the MSYS icon. Doesn't 'bash' come up? > > LZ> rxvt comes up where if I type SET one of the outputs generated > LZ> is > LZ> SHELL=/bin/sh > LZ> and also > LZ> BASH=/bin/sh > > And, within that rxvt, you *are* running bash, aliased to /bin/sh; > rxvt isn't a shell, I did not say it was - simply provided an account of what takes place when one clicks on the MSYS icon (as per previous poster's suggestion) - in an environment where most people frequently keep providing insufficient info along with their questions/replies, I would have thought that the act of listing a more detailed account of steps would have been welcomed - i guess some people like to patronize regardless as perhaps it somehow justifies their "sense of self". |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-03-13 09:33:43
|
Leon Zadorin wrote, quoting we: >> I'm wondering why it is that so many people insist on calling >> MSYS `MinSYS'? > > may be because it makes more sense, is more natural and intuitive: > MinGW, MinGWiki, MinSYS... (Minimal(ist) => Min) so consider it a bug > in your naming convention. It was not I who coined the name `MSYS', but I respect the wishes of the gentleman who did, (I believe it was Earnie, and that respect is redoubled on account of the huge effort he has almost singlehandedly put into its development). I will neither bastardise nor denigrate that choice of name, just because you consider it an anomaly; `MSYS' it is, and `MSYS' it will remain; I consider it an insult to the original developer, to carelessly call it `MinSYS'. >> GC> Click on the MSYS icon. Doesn't 'bash' come up? >> >> LZ> rxvt comes up where if I type SET one of the outputs generated >> LZ> is >> LZ> SHELL=/bin/sh >> LZ> and also >> LZ> BASH=/bin/sh >> >> And, within that rxvt, you *are* running bash, aliased to /bin/sh; >> rxvt isn't a shell, > > I did not say it was - simply provided an account of what takes place > when one clicks on the MSYS icon (as per previous poster's suggestion) Your wording was sufficiently ambiguous, leading to the impression that you may have thought that it was... > in an environment where most people frequently keep providing > insufficient info along with their questions/replies, I would have > thought that the act of listing a more detailed account of steps > would have been welcomed It is, and your intention is commendable... > i guess some people like to patronize regardless as perhaps it somehow > justifies their "sense of self". There was no intent, on my part, to patronise; I was merely clarifying a perceived ambiguity. Regards, Keith. |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-14 00:39:50
|
On 3/13/07, Keith MARSHALL <kei...@to...> wrote: > It was not I who coined the name `MSYS', but I respect the wishes of > the gentleman who did, (I believe it was Earnie, and that respect is > redoubled on account of the huge effort he has almost singlehandedly > put into its development). I will neither bastardise nor denigrate > that choice of name, just because you consider it an anomaly; `MSYS' > it is, and `MSYS' it will remain; I consider it an insult to the > original developer, to carelessly call it `MinSYS'. Respect and admiration is one thing, not recognizing consistency or just not listening to plain reason is another - don't confuse the two. I also have a lot of admiration for MinGW/MinSYS developers, but that does not mean that one should not evaluate things form logical/unemotional point of view and therefore be able to disagree with certain things (naming convention notwithstanding)... and if there was a good reason to call it MSYS (e.g. at a time of MSYS being coined, the MinSYS was already taken, etc.) then such should have been presented without getting on this pathos-filled "respect" hysteria. For example I could also have stated, in response to your comments about Ffmpeg using bash, that prerequisite for "bash" in Ffmpeg configure scripts is something that I happen to respect as "wishes of their developers" and it is out of that "respect" that I would consider any suggestion of a bug as an insult" ... but I did not state this ... because anyone who takes a logical argument/suggestions-of-a-bug and considers it to be an insult - is simply retarded. > I will neither bastardise nor denigrate > that choice of name, just because you consider it an anomaly; Yes yes - getting rather emotional aren't we? Otherwise, you wold stop contradicting yourself - if you say that it is "just me" who considers MinSYS to be more logical, then why would you write (in a previous post of yours): "I'm wondering why it is that so many people insist on calling MSYS `MinSYS'?" If there are "so many people" who would rather call it MinSYS, then it could not possibly be just me... > Your wording was sufficiently ambiguous, leading to the impression that > you may have thought that it was... then you should have asked for clarification from me re. ambiguity in question and your subsequent impression - instead of making incorrect assumptions and then acting upon them. > There was no intent, on my part, to patronise; intent != result |
From: leon z. <leo...@gm...> - 2007-03-14 06:20:59
|
> > I will neither bastardise nor denigrate > > that choice of name, just because you consider it an anomaly; > > Yes yes - getting rather emotional aren't we? Otherwise, you wold stop > contradicting yourself - if you say that it is "just me" who considers > MinSYS to be more logical, then why would you write (in a previous > post of yours): > "I'm wondering why it is that so many people insist on calling MSYS `MinSYS'?" > If there are "so many people" who would rather call it MinSYS, then it > could not possibly be just me... To clarify a little further, my objection to your post is that the phrase "just because you consider it an anomaly" had conveniently left out an earlier statement of yours which mentioned that there are "so many people" who insist on calling MSYS the same way that I did/do - MinSYS. Consequently, your argument was being presented in contradiction to the context set out by your earlier posts: as if the MinSYS calling practice is somehow a point of conflict just because I consider it to be a more logical option and not due to the fact that it happens to be the preference of so many others as well. I am pointing out this fact together with illustrating the subsequent bias and lack of objectivity in your "arguments". To avoid this, you should have stated: > I will neither bastardise nor denigrate > that choice of name, just because you [AND SO MANY OTHERS] consider it an anomaly; to which the only available response is "ya voll' furer". Seriously though, enough of this emotional "pissing around" - if you want to reject something that happens to be more logical for no reason other than some perverted sense of admiration and loyalty - go get a life... I am terminating my involvement in this particular thread. Over and out. |
From: Keith M. <kei...@to...> - 2007-03-14 12:35:51
|
WRT correct use of the name `MSYS', vs. the incorrect `MinSYS', Liam Gadabout (or some such name which doesn't quite match what I expect humans to be called) wrote: > Seriously though, enough of this emotional "pissing around" - if you > want to reject something that happens to be more logical for no reason > other than some perverted sense of admiration and loyalty - go get a > life... I am terminating my involvement in this particular thread. > Over and out. Always the last resort of he who tries to defend the indefensible, yet still insists on having the last word; if he's convinced me of anything, it's that he's an arrogant prat. And that is positively *my* final word on the subject. This list supports MSYS, not some mythical product called MinSYS; if you want support for that, look to the MinSYS list, wherever that might be. Regards, Keith. |