Re: [Plib-users] problem (with plib) while installing SimGear(FlightGear)

[Sebastian U. <ud...@ha...>]

On Thu, 06 Jun 2002, de...@es... (Ferr=E9ol de SORAS) wrote:
> Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2002 22:22:52 +0300
> To: pli...@li...
> From: de...@es... (Ferr=E9ol de SORAS)
> Subject: Re: [Plib-users] problem      (with plib) while installing
> SimGear(FlightGear)
>
> problem ended
>
> i created a symbolic link to the glut headers directory in the place
> most program would like to find them, and it works perfectly

Certainly a good idea - gcc doesn't by default search for header files in
/usr/src/somepackage-whateverversion/, and by the way - since you
mentitoned having tried that - as far as I know SimGear doesn't support t=
he
--with-GL option as PLIB does.

As I said: I bet if you used the packages that came with your distributio=
n,
that is, if you put everything at the right place in case you compiled GL=
UT
yourself, SimGear would have configure'd flawlessly ...


> (now the problem is with FlightGear install, but it is another mailing
> list)

Yes.


> a least i have learnt something : information in log files are more
> significant than information from standards outputs, because standard
> output said it was a problem with plib, and it wasn't...

Right. What matters is the actual compiler output - configure just tells
you that the compiler test failed, but not why.

However, configure did not say that there was a problem with PLIB. This i=
s
your interpretition. It just said that it could not compile a simple
program that includes the pu.h header file, which may mean that there is =
a
problem with the PLIB installation, but also that something is wrong with
one of PLIB's direct or indirect dependancies.

That is the reason why you are right when saying that "information in log
files are more significant than information from standard outputs".


- Sebastian