Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:

> Thanks Peter.
>
> On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
>> > Another package I'm missing perhaps?
>>
>>
> (lib)ncurses.
>
> Thanks. A bit of googling led me to
> http://webusers.npl.uiuc.edu/~yangrz/Emacs.html
>
> So, for a new Ubuntu install.
>
> $apt-get install libc6-dev g++ libncurses5-dev
> $./configure
> $./make
> $./make install
>
> did it for me.
>
> Now executable... in a window... if you see what I mean?
> I'm getting the text based emacs from 10 years ago?

How about actually reading the messages configure gives you?  It tells
you about every single development library it can't find and/or use.

And would it really be hard to imagine that without X11 development
libraries you won't get X11 support?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:51:45 +0200
> 
> How about actually reading the messages configure gives you?  It tells
> you about every single development library it can't find and/or use.
> 
> And would it really be hard to imagine that without X11 development
> libraries you won't get X11 support?

He asked for help.  He's obviously not an experienced tinkerer.
There's no need to be angry with him; he just needs guidance.

Dave, please look at the report that `configure' displays when it
finishes, and make sure you have all the required packages so that
`configure' finds them.  In particular, without X11 headers and
libraries you will get only a text-terminal version of Emacs.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 08/09/2007, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
> > Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:51:45 +0200
> >
> > How about actually reading the messages configure gives you?  It tells
> > you about every single development library it can't find and/or use.
> >
> > And would it really be hard to imagine that without X11 development
> > libraries you won't get X11 support?
>
> He asked for help.  He's obviously not an experienced tinkerer.

Admitted, I'm coming across as a dummy. I am.
But then I'm sure David needed the dummies guide at one time.



>
> Dave, please look at the report that `configure' displays when it
> finishes, and make sure you have all the required packages so that
> `configure' finds them.  In particular, without X11 headers and
> libraries you will get only a text-terminal version of Emacs.

Not too helpful.

Should Emacs use mmap(2) for buffer allocation?         no
  What window system should Emacs use?                    none
  What toolkit should Emacs use?                          none
  Where do we find X Windows header files?                NONE
  Where do we find X Windows libraries?                   NONE
  Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 no
  Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   no
  Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  no
  Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  no
  Does Emacs use -lungif?                                 no
  Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   no
  Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   no

I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu understands.
Back to google.

Thanks Eli.

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Andrea Vettorello]

On 9/8/07, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:

[...]

> Not too helpful.
>
> Should Emacs use mmap(2) for buffer allocation?         no
>   What window system should Emacs use?                    none
>   What toolkit should Emacs use?                          none
>   Where do we find X Windows header files?                NONE
>   Where do we find X Windows libraries?                   NONE
>   Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 no
>   Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   no
>   Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  no
>   Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  no
>   Does Emacs use -lungif?                                 no
>   Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   no
>   Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   no
>
> I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu understands.
> Back to google.
>

As an hint, look at the "Build-Depends:" line of the
"emacs22_22.1+1-2.dsc" file you can find at
http://packages.debian.org/sid/emacs22 (Ubuntu uses Debian as
upstream), you probably dont' need all the packages listed, as at
least a couple are for package creation, not Emacs dependencies
(quilt, imagemagick, sharutils).

If you download the three files (original, dsc, and diff), you could
use the Debian (Ubuntu should use the same) "dpkg-dev" tools to build
a deb package (dpkg-buildpackage)...


-- 
Andrea

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Andrea Vettorello]

On 9/8/07, Andrea Vettorello <andrea.vettorello@gmail.com> wrote:

[...]

> As an hint, look at the "Build-Depends:" line of the
> "emacs22_22.1+1-2.dsc" file you can find at
> http://packages.debian.org/sid/emacs22 (Ubuntu uses Debian as
> upstream), you probably dont' need all the packages listed, as at
> least a couple are for package creation, not Emacs dependencies
> (quilt, imagemagick, sharutils).
>
> If you download the three files (original, dsc, and diff), you could
> use the Debian (Ubuntu should use the same) "dpkg-dev" tools to build
> a deb package (dpkg-buildpackage)...
>

The equivalent Ubuntu page:
http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty-backports/editors/emacs22


-- 
Andrea

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 08.09.2007 um 12:54 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu  
> understands.
> Back to google.

Ahh, really? Isn't it obvious that the libraries Xaw3d, Xpm, jpeg,  
tiff, ungif, and png are missing and also all X11 libraries and C  
header files?

--
Greetings

   Pete

"Isn't vi that text editor with two modes... one that beeps and one
that corrupts your file?" -- Dan Jacobson, on comp.os.linux.advocacy

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
>
> Am 08.09.2007 um 12:54 schrieb Dave Pawson:
>
> > I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu
> > understands.
> > Back to google.
>
> Ahh, really? Isn't it obvious that the libraries Xaw3d, Xpm, jpeg,
> tiff, ungif, and png are missing and also all X11 libraries and C
> header files?


To be honest Pete no. At least not for me.

Browsing, I found libX11-6 (already installed)
Xaw3d translates into Found: xaw3dg, xaw3dg-dev, freeciv-client-xaw3d
Xpm translates into Found: libgdchart-gd2-noxpm,
libgdchart-gd2-noxpm-dev, libxpm-dev, libxpm4, libxpm4-dbg (and 19
others)
jpeg. Found: libjpeg-progs, libjpeg62, libjpeg62-dev,
avifile-mjpeg-plugin, cl-jpeg (and 9 others)
tiff. Found: libtiff-tools, libtiff4, libtiff4-dev, libtiffxx0c2,
kdc2tiff (and 1 others)
ungif. Found: libungif4-dev, libungif4g, libungif-bin
png. Found: netpbm, cl-png, dvipng, gif2png, libclan2c2a-png (and 19 others)

C header files?
Perhaps
<quote>
In order to compile C/C++ programs using Ubuntu you need to have the
build-essential package installed.

sudo apt-get -y install build-essential
</quote>

Sounds good.

As for choosing between the others? Beyond me Peter.

I guess I'll stick with 21.4, or start the whole nausea again and revert to FC7.

Thanks for the help though.
Your input is appreciated.

regards






-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 08.09.2007 um 13:45 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> Browsing, I found libX11-6 (already installed)
> Xaw3d translates into Found: xaw3dg, xaw3dg-dev, freeciv-client-xaw3d

To me Xaw3d does not seem to be the same as xaw3dg, xaw3dg-dev,  
freeciv-client-xaw3d is completely irrelevant.

> Xpm translates into Found: libgdchart-gd2-noxpm,
> libgdchart-gd2-noxpm-dev, libxpm-dev, libxpm4, libxpm4-dbg (and 19
> others)

Correct: libxpm-dev, libxpm4.

> jpeg. Found: libjpeg-progs, libjpeg62, libjpeg62-dev,
> avifile-mjpeg-plugin, cl-jpeg (and 9 others)

Libjpeg62, libjpeg62-dev look right.

> tiff. Found: libtiff-tools, libtiff4, libtiff4-dev, libtiffxx0c2,
> kdc2tiff (and 1 others)

These two seem right: libtiff4, libtiff4-dev

> ungif. Found: libungif4-dev, libungif4g, libungif-bin

I don't think that libungif4g means libungif4, or is ``one´´ the same  
as ``gone´´? But libungif4-dev looks fine. Libgif can be used, too.

> png. Found: netpbm, cl-png, dvipng, gif2png, libclan2c2a-png (and  
> 19 others)

The 19 others have the right packages.

--
Greetings

   Pete

Globalisation -- communism from above.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:

> To me Xaw3d does not seem to be the same as xaw3dg, xaw3dg-dev,
> freeciv-client-xaw3d is completely irrelevant.

Unresolved.


> Correct: libxpm-dev,
OK

libjpeg62-dev look right.
OK
> libtiff4-dev
OK

>But libungif4-dev looks fine. Libgif can be used, too.
libungif4-dev
OK


>
> > png. Found: netpbm, cl-png, dvipng, gif2png, libclan2c2a-png (and
> > 19 others)
>
> The 19 others have the right packages.

Not yet resolved.

An off list post suggested:

$ ./configure --with-gtk --enable-font-backend --with-xft

Is this a required build parameter to get the graphics front end?
Seems like an appropriate incantation?

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

Improving.
  I'll post the full package list if/when it works.

This from ./configure

Configured for `i686-pc-linux-gnu'.

  Where should the build process find the source code?    /temp/emacs-22.1
  What operating system and machine description files should Emacs use?
        `s/gnu-linux.h' and `m/intel386.h'
  What compiler should emacs be built with?               gcc -g -O2
-Wno-pointer-sign
  Should Emacs use the GNU version of malloc?             yes
      (Using Doug Lea's new malloc from the GNU C Library.)
  Should Emacs use a relocating allocator for buffers?    yes
  Should Emacs use mmap(2) for buffer allocation?         no
  What window system should Emacs use?                    x11
  What toolkit should Emacs use?                          none
  Where do we find X Windows header files?                Standard dirs
  Where do we find X Windows libraries?                   Standard dirs
  Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 no
  Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   yes
  Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  yes
  Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  yes
  Does Emacs use -lungif?                                 yes
  Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   yes
  Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   no



Any suggestions about the X toolkit scroll bars please?
Needed or not?

ran make.

Still non-graphical!

regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 08.09.2007 um 15:03 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> Any suggestions about the X toolkit scroll bars please?

No. What are README and INSTALL suggesting? I haven't read them for a  
while ...

> Needed or not?

Opinions differ.

--
Greetings

   Pete

Upgraded:  Didn't work the first time.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:03:32 +0100
> From: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
> Cc: emac list <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> 
>   Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 no
>   Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   yes
>   Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  yes
>   Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  yes
>   Does Emacs use -lungif?                                 yes
>   Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   yes
>   Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   no
> 
> 
> 
> Any suggestions about the X toolkit scroll bars please?
> Needed or not?

Not needed as long as you don't use Xaw3d (or Motif or Lesstif).

> ran make.
> 
> Still non-graphical!

You should have run "make distclean" before running `configure' after
installing the missing packages.  If you didn't do that, I suggest to
rebuild after "make distclean".

Also, be sure you are running the correct binary, not the one built
before you had X11 installed.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:03:32 +0100
> From: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
> Cc: emac list <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>

This looks wrong:

>   What toolkit should Emacs use?                          none

What happens if you try the "--with-gtk" switch to configure?

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 08/09/2007, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 14:03:32 +0100
> > From: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
> > Cc: emac list <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
>
> This looks wrong:
>
> >   What toolkit should Emacs use?                          none
>
> What happens if you try the "--with-gtk" switch to configure?

Beat you to it Eli :-)

./configure --with-x-toolkit=gtk


And no, still the same
make distclean; ./configure; make
$src/emacs is still in text mode.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

Success, or a step forward at least.
as root, I'm still getting the text based version. Why? No idea.

However, as a normal user...

I now have 21.4 emacs (graphics based) loaded, from /usr/bin/emacs21
which I think is the Ubuntu default.

I also seem to have built, and installed, emacs 22
This is GNU Emacs 22.1.2 (i686-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 2.10.11)

 which emacs
/usr/local/bin/emacs


Just minor problems left now.
  mouse-wheel support?  Yes, I know. Google it :-)

So far so good!

Thanks for your help.

I'll try and list the packages for other Ubuntu users in a separate post.

Thanks for your patience Eli.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 16:19:35 +0100
> From: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> 
> as root, I'm still getting the text based version. Why? No idea.

Probably because it's aliased to "emacs -nw" or something.  root
sometimes needs to run when there's no X support yet.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 16:19:35 +0100
>> From: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
>> Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
>> 
>> as root, I'm still getting the text based version. Why? No idea.
>
> Probably because it's aliased to "emacs -nw" or something.  root
> sometimes needs to run when there's no X support yet.

More likely because "as root" he does not have DISPLAY set properly,
or XAUTHORITY.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 08.09.2007 um 17:19 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> Success, or a step forward at least.
> as root, I'm still getting the text based version. Why? No idea.

Have you X11 running? Have you allowed root to open X clients on your  
X display? Has root a DISPLAY environment variable set?

>
> Just minor problems left now.
>   mouse-wheel support?  Yes, I know. Google it :-)

No: RTFM! That's faster. There is no mouse-wheel support in a  
terminal emulation. The X client is aware of the mouse-wheel.

--
Greetings

   Pete

Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists  
elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.
                     -- Bill Watterson, in his comic strip Calvin and  
Hobbes

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
> > Success, or a step forward at least.
> > as root, I'm still getting the text based version. Why? No idea.
>
> Have you X11 running? Have you allowed root to open X clients on your
> X display? Has root a DISPLAY environment variable set?

I see no reason why Ubuntu denies root graphics.
I was a little surprised at that Fedora has no such differentiation.

>
> >
> > Just minor problems left now.
> >   mouse-wheel support?  Yes, I know. Google it :-)
>
> No: RTFM! That's faster. There is no mouse-wheel support in a
> terminal emulation. The X client is aware of the mouse-wheel.

Yes. I found wheelmouse, but it was buggy. Worked by default
when I used emacs from a normal user.

Thanks Peter.


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 08.09.2007 um 14:33 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> $ ./configure --with-gtk --enable-font-backend --with-xft

Amazing! My configure script does not reveal the last two options ...

--
Greetings

   Pete

   It's not the valleys in life I dread so much as the dips.
                     -- Garfield

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@Web.DE>
> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:23:33 +0200
> Cc: emac list <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> 
> 
> Am 08.09.2007 um 12:54 schrieb Dave Pawson:
> 
> > I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu  
> > understands.
> > Back to google.
> 
> Ahh, really? Isn't it obvious that the libraries Xaw3d, Xpm, jpeg,  
> tiff, ungif, and png are missing and also all X11 libraries and C  
> header files?

Even if it's obvious that Xaw3d is missing when `configure' says
something about "-lXaw3d", the name of the Ubuntu package that one
needs to download is quite clearly NOT obvious.

Now, if `configure' would say something like

  Xaw3d library not found, suggest to download xaw3dg-dev package

_then_ it would have been obvious.

Can we please look at this from the OP's point of view, instead of
demonstrating how much smarter we-all are?  That way, we might
actually learn how to improve Emacs, in addition to being nice and
helpful.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@Web.DE>
>> Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:23:33 +0200
>> Cc: emac list <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
>> 
>> 
>> Am 08.09.2007 um 12:54 schrieb Dave Pawson:
>> 
>> > I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu  
>> > understands.
>> > Back to google.
>> 
>> Ahh, really? Isn't it obvious that the libraries Xaw3d, Xpm, jpeg,  
>> tiff, ungif, and png are missing and also all X11 libraries and C  
>> header files?
>
> Even if it's obvious that Xaw3d is missing when `configure' says
> something about "-lXaw3d", the name of the Ubuntu package that one
> needs to download is quite clearly NOT obvious.
>
> Now, if `configure' would say something like
>
>   Xaw3d library not found, suggest to download xaw3dg-dev package
>
> _then_ it would have been obvious.
>
> Can we please look at this from the OP's point of view, instead of
> demonstrating how much smarter we-all are?  That way, we might
> actually learn how to improve Emacs, in addition to being nice and
> helpful.

I doubt that making him choose Emacs for his first project of
compiling anything is nice and helpful or relevant for improving
Emacs.

He'd be much better served by installing Emacs 22.1 from
feisty-backports as far as I can see.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
> Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 14:27:09 +0200
> 
> > Can we please look at this from the OP's point of view, instead of
> > demonstrating how much smarter we-all are?  That way, we might
> > actually learn how to improve Emacs, in addition to being nice and
> > helpful.
> 
> I doubt that making him choose Emacs for his first project of
> compiling anything is nice and helpful or relevant for improving
> Emacs.

I was talking about our attitude when asked for help.  The rest was an
attempt to rationalize the need to be nice and helpful, in case
someone actually needs rationalizations for that.

(And, btw, many packages are nowadays much harder to build than Emacs.
Some of them leave me flabbergasted, notwithstanding the gobs of
packages I've built from sources through the years.)

> He'd be much better served by installing Emacs 22.1 from
> feisty-backports as far as I can see.

If someone suggested him to do that, I wouldn't be complaining about
how we treat newcomers.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:07:01 +0300, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> Even if it's obvious that Xaw3d is missing when `configure' says
> something about "-lXaw3d", the name of the Ubuntu package that one
> needs to download is quite clearly NOT obvious.
>
> Now, if `configure' would say something like
>
>   Xaw3d library not found, suggest to download xaw3dg-dev package
>
> _then_ it would have been obvious.
>
> Can we please look at this from the OP's point of view, instead of
> demonstrating how much smarter we-all are?  That way, we might
> actually learn how to improve Emacs, in addition to being nice and
> helpful.

I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment of looking at problems from
the reporter's point of view.  Especially when the reporter has shown
that he is willing to learn more, and do at least _some_ of his homework
(as Dave has done).

As for improving Emacs, it may not be easy to list the package names of
dozens, hundreds of GNU/Linux distributions, or even other OS systems.
I commonly build Emacs on Solaris and BSD systems too, for example, and
`xaw3dg-dev' doesn't really mean anything useful there.  But that's a
very interesting idea to explore a bit :)

- Giorgos

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:23:33 +0200, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@Web.DE> wrote:
>Am 08.09.2007 um 12:54 schrieb Dave Pawson:
>> I guess I need to translate these into something that Ubuntu
>> understands.
>> Back to google.
>
> Ahh, really? Isn't it obvious that the libraries Xaw3d, Xpm, jpeg,
> tiff, ungif, and png are missing and also all X11 libraries and C
> header files?

No, not really.  At least, not to someone who hasn't seen all those
names before.  I understand that helping someone who "has no clue" may
be frustrating, but can we please tone the thread down a bit?  Some
times, newbies tend to ask "silly" things.  Let's reply with the things
they are missing and where they can learn more, shall we? :-)

Dave, as I'm typing this on a laptop, I'm installing a new desktop
system with Debian "etch".  These names refer to packages which you can
install to supplement your basic Ubuntu installation with extra
libraries which Emacs can use to compile as a GUI application for the
X11 desktop.

You can list many of the packages available for Debian and Ubuntu by
using the "apt-cache" utility:

    # apt-cache search 'xaw'

Try the command for each name you don't understand, or even for parts of
the name, and look at the output apt-cache produces.  If you don't
understand what each package does, look up the name of the package on
`www.debian.org'.  The online package listing at debian.org contains a
wealth of information for each package.

- Giorgos

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

Replying to a couple of Giorgos mails together.

On 08/09/2007, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote:

> No, not really.  At least, not to someone who hasn't seen all those
> names before.  I understand that helping someone who "has no clue" may
> be frustrating, but can we please tone the thread down a bit?  Some
> times, newbies tend to ask "silly" things.  Let's reply with the things
> they are missing and where they can learn more, shall we? :-)

An expression I like. No such thing as a silly question. Only a silly answer:-)
I have had, and I'm getting, the help I need from the list thanks. Try doing
the same with a windows application. Mail Redmond and wait .....


>   These names refer to packages which you can
> install to supplement your basic Ubuntu installation with extra
> libraries which Emacs can use to compile as a GUI application for the
> X11 desktop.
>
> You can list many of the packages available for Debian and Ubuntu by
> using the "apt-cache" utility:
>
>     # apt-cache search 'xaw'

Someone else pointed out the gui version, C-f with synaptics.
It still needs research/help to translate the responses though.



>
> Try the command for each name you don't understand, or even for parts of
> the name, and look at the output apt-cache produces.  If you don't
> understand what each package does, look up the name of the package on
> `www.debian.org'.  The online package listing at debian.org contains a
> wealth of information for each package.

I'm unsure about the relationship of Ubuntu to Debian.
Some pages seem to imply that there may be a bad reaction.
So far I've only used packages from the Ubuntu repo's which
are clearly enough.

<gk>
As for improving Emacs, it may not be easy to list the package names of
dozens, hundreds of GNU/Linux distributions, or even other OS systems.
I commonly build Emacs on Solaris and BSD systems too, for example, and
`xaw3dg-dev' doesn't really mean anything useful there.  But that's a
very interesting idea to explore a bit :)
</gk>
I'll collect my findings on my site when I've finished.

<gk>
Now you have gtk-dev too, so Emacs will use the GTK+ `widgets' for
displaying its menu, context menus when you right-click with a mouse,
and neat GTK+ based buttons. </gk>

But only if you run ./configure  --with-x-toolkit=gtk
which is helpful.
Perhaps the INSTALL file could make it clear just what this implies,
for those that don't associate gtk with widgets.

<gk>Now is the time to run `make distclean', or extract a clean tarball of
the Emacs sources and build everything with this latest version of a
build-environment you have installed.</gk>

Sorry, you've lost me here Giorgos.
Each failed attempt was followed by make distclean to clean up the
rubbish. I'm OK with that.
How to extract a clean tarball though?
Do you mean to include all the system level files, i.e. those not in
the emacs distro? Sort of building the linked file from the compiled
object files? Or something quite different.


regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On 2007-09-09 10:47, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 08/09/2007, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote:
>> As for improving Emacs, it may not be easy to list the package names
>> of dozens, hundreds of GNU/Linux distributions, or even other OS
>> systems.  I commonly build Emacs on Solaris and BSD systems too, for
>> example, and `xaw3dg-dev' doesn't really mean anything useful there.
>> But that's a very interesting idea to explore a bit :)
>
> I'll collect my findings on my site when I've finished.

Nice.  IMHO, that's exactly the free software spirit that we should
foster in communities like the Emacs' users community.

Please note that the Emacs source tree contains already a lot of useful
documentation of this sort.  The file `etc/MACHINES' lists various
configure script options, environment setup and other useful bits that
building Emacs may require.

I don't see Ubuntu GNU/Linux mentioned in the current CVS tree of Emacs,
so if you are willing to collect some of the experience you have gained
so far in a short, concise summary -- something like a paragraph or two
-- it may be a very useful addition to the mini guides of that file :-)

>> Now you have gtk-dev too, so Emacs will use the GTK+ `widgets' for
>> displaying its menu, context menus when you right-click with a mouse,
>> and neat GTK+ based buttons.
>
> But only if you run ./configure --with-x-toolkit=gtk which is helpful.

If you are building a fairly recent snapshot of Emacs from CVS, then
this should already be the default.  Having said that, it is probably ok
to be a little more verbose in the help text, if you feel like it.

> Perhaps the INSTALL file could make it clear just what this implies,
> for those that don't associate gtk with widgets.

The relevant bits of text are already there.  My INSTALL copy contains
among other things:

% To get more attractive menus, you can specify an X toolkit when you
% configure Emacs; use the option `--with-x-toolkit=TOOLKIT', where
% TOOLKIT is `athena', `motif' or `gtk' (`yes' and `lucid' are synonyms
% for `athena').  On some systems, it does not work to use a toolkit
% with shared libraries.  A free implementation of Motif, called
% LessTif, is available from <http://www.lesstif.org>.  Compiling with
% LessTif or Motif causes a standard File Selection Dialog to pop up
% when you invoke file commands with the mouse.  You can get fancy
% 3D-style scroll bars, even without LessTif/Motif, if you have the
% Xaw3d library installed (see "Image support libraries" above for Xaw3d
% availability).

>> Now is the time to run `make distclean', or extract a clean tarball
>> of the Emacs sources and build everything with this latest version of
>> a build-environment you have installed.
>
> Sorry, you've lost me here Giorgos.
> Each failed attempt was followed by make distclean to clean up the
> rubbish. I'm OK with that.
> How to extract a clean tarball though?

I meant a clean copy of the Emacs source tree, but you already ran make
distclean, so you should be fine :)

Happy hacking,
Giorgos

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> writes:

> On 2007-09-09 10:47, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 08/09/2007, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote:
>>> As for improving Emacs, it may not be easy to list the package names
>>> of dozens, hundreds of GNU/Linux distributions, or even other OS
>>> systems.  I commonly build Emacs on Solaris and BSD systems too, for
>>> example, and `xaw3dg-dev' doesn't really mean anything useful there.
>>> But that's a very interesting idea to explore a bit :)
>>
>> I'll collect my findings on my site when I've finished.
>
> Nice.  IMHO, that's exactly the free software spirit that we should
> foster in communities like the Emacs' users community.

I don't agree: as a package maintainer, it is _one_ major source of
irritation if people who can't be bothered to read the installation
instructions then put up a web site with their personal take on how
things should work.  10 years later, still people use those
instructions to paint themselves into a corner and complain on mailing
lists and newsgroups how broken things are.

If a user figures out something that is missing in the documentation,
he should contribute to the _upstream_ documentation instead of
creating _another_ incomplete inaccurate experience report that will
work, if you are lucky, on one particular platform with one particular
version if at all, possibly breaking a number of things in the process
that the report creator was not aware of.

_If_ there is something wrong with the upstream documentation, helping
to fix it is _much_ more important and helpful than putting up another
thing in competition.  Scattering partial information of inscrutable
quality all around the web helps nobody.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 16:55:12 +0200, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> writes:
>>On 2007-09-09 10:47, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'll collect my findings on my site when I've finished.
>>
>> Nice.  IMHO, that's exactly the free software spirit that we should
>> foster in communities like the Emacs' users community.
>
> I don't agree: as a package maintainer, it is _one_ major source of
> irritation if people who can't be bothered to read the installation
> instructions then put up a web site with their personal take on how
> things should work.  10 years later, still people use those
> instructions to paint themselves into a corner and complain on mailing
> lists and newsgroups how broken things are.
>
> If a user figures out something that is missing in the documentation,
> he should contribute to the _upstream_ documentation instead of
> creating _another_ incomplete inaccurate experience report that will
> work, if you are lucky, on one particular platform with one particular
> version if at all, possibly breaking a number of things in the process
> that the report creator was not aware of.
>
> _If_ there is something wrong with the upstream documentation, helping
> to fix it is _much_ more important and helpful than putting up another
> thing in competition.  Scattering partial information of inscrutable
> quality all around the web helps nobody.

Right.  I don't disagree with this at all.  Which is just below the text to which you replied I wrote:

% Please note that the Emacs source tree contains already a lot of
% useful documentation of this sort.  The file `etc/MACHINES' lists
% various configure script options, environment setup and other useful
% bits that building Emacs may require.
%
% I don't see Ubuntu GNU/Linux mentioned in the current CVS tree of
% Emacs, so if you are willing to collect some of the experience you
% have gained so far in a short, concise summary -- something like a
% paragraph or two -- it may be a very useful addition to the mini
% guides of that file :-)

I happen to severely dislike random web sites with out of date "howto"
information, googled semi-randomly by 15-year old teenagers, who then
like complaining that "Linux is hard".

I understand the drive behind trying to "document" things this way, but
what you described (and what I had suggested in the snipped text
re-quoted above is a much better way of improving Emacs).

So we are in perfect agreement here :-)

- Giorgos

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 09/09/2007, Tim X <timx@nospam.dev.null> wrote:

> While this is all correct and sound advice, I doubt it will be useful for
> Dave as it will require understanding that would appear to be way past his
> level at present (this is not meant to be a harsh or negative criticism).

Quite true.
I've used ./configure; make install before, but if it failed, the package
wasn't installed. Period.
Just that emacs is worth the effort.

..... summarised as rtfm.

Yes Tim. Agreed. But kindly said.
"However, it really seems that the OP isn't doing the minimum
sensible things, such as reading the documentation."
For which I'm sorry. This thread is far too long .

It's Sunday, I'm quiet so I'll go do some reading.
Maybe even re-install the OS from scratch and start again.

<tc>Dave, if your choice is either build from sources or revert back to emacs
21, my question would be why not use the available emacs 22 debian package
and save yourself the headaches? </tc>
For the same reason it doesn't work from source Tim. Ubuntu seemingly
must fit on a single CD, so the packages that I need to run
http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty-backports/editors/emacs22 are quite
likely the same. I tried it... and it failed.
/me Wonder if my 'trying it' was simply trying it as root without X support,
i.e. it would fail regardless.



<tc>Also note that switching to another distro won't help - you have the same
issues on nearly all GNU Linux distros. Most distros only install the stuff
required to run programs, not the stuff required to build them. Its assumed
that anyone who is building software will know which development libraries
they need to install. Last time I used RedHat, they also used the libxyz
and libxyz-dev type convention with their RPMs. This is not a ubuntu or
debian specific issue (though package names can vary slightly).</tc>

I came from Fedora Core 6/7. There, since they are, on principle, ahead
of the game, and use a full 6 CD install, emacs is currently 22.1, so I've
never had to do this previously for emacs. OK, I've been spoiled.


<tc>/configure --with-x-toolkit=gtk \
   --with-sound=yes --prefix=/usr/local

however, I think the default x-toolkit setting is now gtk, so it should not
be required and the default install prefix is /usr/local, so that one
probably isn't required either. I like to be explicit, which is why I
include them.</tc>

emacs has sound! Sheesh.
Tim, I think you're wrong about the latter though. When I built prior
to having --with-x-toolkit=gtk, I wasn't offered anything. I guess the default
is nox? I'll stand corrected on that, but that's what I found.

<tc>Note that if your building from CVS, for the first build, you need make
bootstrap. See INSTALL-CVS</tc>

I wondered what that 'make bootstrap' was all about. It produced
dozens of warnings. Yes Tim, I'll rtfm :-)

<tc>X uses a 'magic cookie' to control access to the X display. Essentially,
you have to have this cookie (usually stored in .Xauthority in order to
write to access the display. If you run emacs and it cannot open the X
display, it will run in text mode.

I think its generally a bad idea to build and test software as root if its
not required. I always build emacs as a normal user and test it as that
user. I only switch to root to run make install as that process needs root
privs to write to /usr/local.</tc>

Thanks for the full story Tim.
IMHO this is somethat that needs to be in red, in the install document.
Your key advice there seems to be build and test as a normal user.
I guess there's no reason not to. Then switch to root for the install.
Not knowing other distro's, I wonder if Fedora is odd in allowing
X from root. I have always done su - to do root based tasks. Ubuntu
is odd to me in insisting on no root user (or password, at least).
I guess I'd have finished in half the time had I been testing as a normal
user. Sigh.

<tc>I'm always amazed at how, in this day of open source, people will download
software from some unknown/untrusted source and then build and run it as
root for the first time.</tc>

I guess I've been lucky for the last 20 years Tim.
I only judge the source, be it a person
with a floppy or a website.


Many thanks Tim. And points taken.

regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:

> On 09/09/2007, Tim X <timx@nospam.dev.null> wrote:
>
>> While this is all correct and sound advice, I doubt it will be useful for
>> Dave as it will require understanding that would appear to be way past his
>> level at present (this is not meant to be a harsh or negative criticism).
>
> Quite true.
> I've used ./configure; make install before, but if it failed, the package
> wasn't installed. Period.
> Just that emacs is worth the effort.

Why don't you enable feisty-backports in your /etc/apt/sources.list,
do
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install emacs22-gtk
(or what the package name is)

and be done with it?  Why the insistence on compiling everything
yourself?

> For the same reason it doesn't work from source Tim. Ubuntu
> seemingly must fit on a single CD, so the packages that I need to
> run http://packages.ubuntu.com/feisty-backports/editors/emacs22 are
> quite likely the same. I tried it... and it failed.

Huh?  apt-get (or the graphical frontends) will fetch and install all
requirements, too.

I really don't understand why you think you have to compile Emacs
yourself.  It really sounds like you would be much better served with
learning your steps around your operating system's package system
rather than around Emacs compilation.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Tim X]

Dave, just a very short point which I think may make your life a lot
easier.

From your response to what I wrote, it seems to me that the real problem
you had was just not being familiar with the new distro and its package
management. 

In this day of advanced package management and readily available packages,
combined with distros like Ubuntu which work hard at eliminating the need
for most people to get 'down 'n dirty', it is possibly even more important
to become familiar with the OS than anything else. 

All your issues with available emacs22 deb packages, problems of
compilation, differences in how root and X interact etc are all due to
distro specific differences. 

I get the impression you are possibly trying to make ubuntu feel like
fedora or what you are use to - while I can fully understand this, its
really like trying to put a square peg in a round whole. 

I would forget about learning about configure, make and building/installing
sources. Instead, read about ubuntu, visit ubuntu forums and get to know
your OS. From what you have written, I suspect you are the sort of user who
just wants the power and don't want to get down to the low level
stuff. This is fine and why ubuntu was put together. Let others do the low
level stuff and concentrate on making the most from the (by all reports)
excellent work of the Ubuntu team in liberating users form having to get
down to the bare metal. If you ever want to get to the bare metal, you can
always switch to a distro like Gentoo.

good luck

Tim

-- 
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

On 10/09/2007, Tim X <timx@nospam.dev.null> wrote:
>
> Dave, just a very short point which I think may make your life a lot
> easier.
>
> From your response to what I wrote, it seems to me that the real problem
> you had was just not being familiar with the new distro and its package
> management.

True. The reason I wanted emacs was simply because I'd moved
to a new distro.

>
> In this day of advanced package management and readily available packages,
> combined with distros like Ubuntu which work hard at eliminating the need
> for most people to get 'down 'n dirty', it is possibly even more important
> to become familiar with the OS than anything else.

E.g. It's just taken me 45 minutes to find out how to get acroread installed.
I'm afraid I don't like this move towards 'making it easy' when that
step hides so much behind a Redmond like wall.

>
> All your issues with available emacs22 deb packages, problems of
> compilation, differences in how root and X interact etc are all due to
> distro specific differences.

I'm curious how hard it would be on FC7 to find the right packages.
I'm tempted to try that if I can find a spare machine.
+1 to the rest.


>
> I get the impression you are possibly trying to make ubuntu feel like
> fedora or what you are use to - while I can fully understand this, its
> really like trying to put a square peg in a round whole.

I'm afraid its the only experience I have to fall back on Tim...
Other than Coherant from early 1980's, which wouldn't be much use.


>
> I would forget about learning about configure, make and building/installing
> sources. Instead, read about ubuntu, visit ubuntu forums and get to know
> your OS.
I'm having to do that as well, in parallel. I've another 40 or so apps that
I'd like to install.


 From what you have written, I suspect you are the sort of user who
> just wants the power and don't want to get down to the low level
> stuff.
Maybe, now. My programming started with mc code then 68K assembler
writing drivers. I.e. I've been down and dirty.


 This is fine and why ubuntu was put together. Let others do the low
> level stuff and concentrate on making the most from the (by all reports)
> excellent work of the Ubuntu team in liberating users form having to get
> down to the bare metal. If you ever want to get to the bare metal, you can
> always switch to a distro like Gentoo.

Emacs is a tool I use daily Tim. That's the only reason I'm prepared to
put work into getting it up and running. Trying to help improve the docs
seems to be unwanted. Fine by me.

regards


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 10.09.2007 um 11:52 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> I'm curious how hard it would be on FC7 to find the right packages.

Like a kids game ... IMO.

> I'm tempted to try that if I can find a spare machine.

Virtual machines do not waste so much power and place.

--
Greetings

   Pete

Behold the warranty ... the bold print giveth and the fine print  
taketh away.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:

> On 08/09/2007, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> > From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>> > Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:51:45 +0200
>> >
>> > How about actually reading the messages configure gives you?  It tells
>> > you about every single development library it can't find and/or use.
>> >
>> > And would it really be hard to imagine that without X11 development
>> > libraries you won't get X11 support?
>>
>> He asked for help.  He's obviously not an experienced tinkerer.
>
> Admitted, I'm coming across as a dummy. I am.
> But then I'm sure David needed the dummies guide at one time.

Be careful what you are sure about.  When I started computing, there
were no dummy guides.  Before being able to boot my first computer
(which I soldered together myself with a "kit"), I had to design and
solder a floppy controller, write the bootstrap loader, write the
BIOS.

If you are going to compile Emacs yourself, you better read the
instructions for doing so.  If you don't see that you understand them
or don't want to invest the time until you do, it would likely be
easier if you just installed a precompiled version of Emacs 22.1 from
Gutsy instead.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Richard G Riley]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 08/09/2007, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>>> > From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>>> > Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 11:51:45 +0200
>>> >
>>> > How about actually reading the messages configure gives you?  It tells
>>> > you about every single development library it can't find and/or use.
>>> >
>>> > And would it really be hard to imagine that without X11 development
>>> > libraries you won't get X11 support?
>>>
>>> He asked for help.  He's obviously not an experienced tinkerer.
>>
>> Admitted, I'm coming across as a dummy. I am.
>> But then I'm sure David needed the dummies guide at one time.
>
> Be careful what you are sure about.  When I started computing, there
> were no dummy guides.  Before being able to boot my first computer
> (which I soldered together myself with a "kit"), I had to design and
> solder a floppy controller, write the bootstrap loader, write the
> BIOS.
>
> If you are going to compile Emacs yourself, you better read the
> instructions for doing so.  If you don't see that you understand them
> or don't want to invest the time until you do, it would likely be
> easier if you just installed a precompiled version of Emacs 22.1 from
> Gutsy instead.

Because you can do it, doesn't mean that others, with less experience
and/or ability, can.

I concur that trying to build Emacs on Ubuntu is not for the faint
hearted or those with limited build environment experience.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

Richard G Riley <rileyrgdev@googlemail.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> If you are going to compile Emacs yourself, you better read the
>> instructions for doing so.  If you don't see that you understand
>> them or don't want to invest the time until you do, it would likely
>> be easier if you just installed a precompiled version of Emacs 22.1
>> from Gutsy instead.
>
> Because you can do it, doesn't mean that others, with less
> experience and/or ability, can.

Experience is not something magically bestowed onto you.  It is
something you have to acquire.

> I concur that trying to build Emacs on Ubuntu is not for the faint
> hearted or those with limited build environment experience.

This has nothing to do with Emacs.  In fact, Emacs is pretty much at
the top of the painlessness scale when it comes to configuring and
compiling a graphical multi-platform application.

In fact, the main complaint people have with the build procedure
appears to be that it _still_ builds something useful even in severely
limited build environments.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Richard G Riley]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Richard G Riley <rileyrgdev@googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> If you are going to compile Emacs yourself, you better read the
>>> instructions for doing so.  If you don't see that you understand
>>> them or don't want to invest the time until you do, it would likely
>>> be easier if you just installed a precompiled version of Emacs 22.1
>>> from Gutsy instead.
>>
>> Because you can do it, doesn't mean that others, with less
>> experience and/or ability, can.
>
> Experience is not something magically bestowed onto you.  It is
> something you have to acquire.

Yes. And sometimes that experience is passed on by word of mouth and or
help groups like this. Some people need the INSTALL file described in a
different way. It's why help groups exist. Almost everything asked here
has been asked before and could probably be solved via google.

>
>> I concur that trying to build Emacs on Ubuntu is not for the faint
>> hearted or those with limited build environment experience.
>
> This has nothing to do with Emacs.  In fact, Emacs is pretty much at
> the top of the painlessness scale when it comes to configuring and
> compiling a graphical multi-platform application.

No one suggested otherwise. But it's not too extreme to consider that
there may be people here familiar with the processes involved. Often
people need a helping pointer and not just an RTFM - there is a lot of
information out there and sometimes it is hard to see the wood for the
trees. I sympathize with your point of view to a degree, but it's always
worth, IMO, stepping back and putting yourself into the shoes of the
person asking for help. It is very simple - if it really were so easy or
so self evident, then why do so many people ask the same things?

> In fact, the main complaint people have with the build procedure
> appears to be that it _still_ builds something useful even in severely
> limited build environments.

I haven't see that complaint, I must admit.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[David Kastrup]

Richard G Riley <rileyrgdev@googlemail.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> In fact, the main complaint people have with the build procedure
>> appears to be that it _still_ builds something useful even in
>> severely limited build environments.
>
> I haven't see that complaint, I must admit.

Then you have not followed the thread: Dave Pawson complained that the
Emacs he managed to compile with minimal libraries did not support
X11.  And he complained over several iterations that what he compiled
seemed sub-par to him, because Emacs compiled something as good as
possible considering the available libraries.

He is not the first one with a complaint like that.  IIRC, Emacs 23
(and possibly also 22.2, don't remember) will balk at compiling an
Emacs omitting libraries which are present in compiled form but
without compilation support, unless you explicitly disable the
particular library support.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Richard G Riley]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Richard G Riley <rileyrgdev@googlemail.com> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> In fact, the main complaint people have with the build procedure
>>> appears to be that it _still_ builds something useful even in
>>> severely limited build environments.
>>
>> I haven't see that complaint, I must admit.
>
> Then you have not followed the thread: Dave Pawson complained that the

I have followed the thread.

> Emacs he managed to compile with minimal libraries did not support
> X11.  And he complained over several iterations that what he compiled
> seemed sub-par to him, because Emacs compiled something as good as
> possible considering the available libraries.

That and what you said might be interpreted differently. He got what he
asked for. It was not what he WANTED, but it is what he asked for in
terms of the compile input. A polite push in the right direction was
then needed. I think this thread has indeed run it's length.

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Tim X]

"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:

> Thanks Peter.
>
> On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
>> > Another package I'm missing perhaps?
>>
>>
> (lib)ncurses.
>
> Thanks. A bit of googling led me to
> http://webusers.npl.uiuc.edu/~yangrz/Emacs.html
>
> So, for a new Ubuntu install.
>
> $apt-get install libc6-dev g++ libncurses5-dev
> $./configure
> $./make
> $./make install
>
> did it for me.
>
> Now executable... in a window... if you see what I mean?
> I'm getting the text based emacs from 10 years ago?
> What's happened to my nice 'semi-graphics' emacs please.
> source from http://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/emacs/emacs-22.1.tar.gz
>

Dave,

I think your falling into the trap so many fall into. Your trying to build
a somewhat complex package, but not using any of the aids provided. It
might seem easiest to just follow the minimum requirements, but often you
end up spending a lot more time trying to then work out why you didn't get
the outcome you expected. 

The very first thing you should do after running configure is examine the
output. Answers to every question you have asked is in that output and
there is further explination in the install docs that wil help you
interpret what these mean and even what arguments to pass to configure to
control the options it selects (ie. whether to build with X, GTK or just a
plain nox version). You can even control where the binaries will be
installed when you do a make install etc. 

I suspect that you have a text based version being built because you don't
have either the necessary GTK libraries or the necessary X toolkit
libraries installed (note that you need dev versions of these to link
against). I also suspect you will find you don't have the image support
that allows emacs to display different image types as the dev versions of
these are normally not installed unless requested. 

When emacs first started supporting GTK, you had to add a
--with-x-toolkit=gtk in order to get the GTK version (otherwise it would
try to use the old X toolkit libs or revert to plain text if these are not
available). However, I think GTK is now the default, so if your not getting
a GTK version, I would guess you don't have the necessary dev libs. 

I *strongly* recommend you read the install docs and look at the output
from configure to see what libs it could not find. This will be far more
efficient than googling and getting outdated instructions or waiting for
responses to newsgroup messages. It will also mean that if you do get into
trouble and need to ask questions on this group, the answers you get will
probably make more sense. 

HTH

Tim


-- 
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Dave Pawson]

Thanks Peter.

On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
> > Another package I'm missing perhaps?
>
>
(lib)ncurses.

Thanks. A bit of googling led me to
http://webusers.npl.uiuc.edu/~yangrz/Emacs.html

So, for a new Ubuntu install.

$apt-get install libc6-dev g++ libncurses5-dev
$./configure
$./make
$./make install

did it for me.

Now executable... in a window... if you see what I mean?
I'm getting the text based emacs from 10 years ago?
What's happened to my nice 'semi-graphics' emacs please.
source from http://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/emacs/emacs-22.1.tar.gz

Nearly,


regards
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 08.09.2007 um 11:48 schrieb Dave Pawson:

> $apt-get install libc6-dev g++ libncurses5-dev

No recommendations to install X11 related things too?

--
Greetings

   Pete

The mathematician who pursues his studies without clear views of this  
matter, must often have the uncomfortable feeling that his paper and  
pencil surpass him in intelligence.
                                            Ernst Mach

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Mathias Megyei]

I had to install more of the *-dev packages (libx11-dev,
libungif-dev, libgtk-dev, ...).

Please look at the output of the configure run, whether
configure has found all of the necessary libraries.

The output from my last build (Emacs 23) looks as follows:

Configured for `i686-pc-linux-gnu'.

  Where should the build process find the source
code?    /home/mathias/gnu/Emacs/emacs
  What operating system and machine description files should Emacs use?
        `s/gnu-linux.h' and `m/intel386.h'
  What compiler should emacs be built with?               gcc -g -O2
-Wno-pointer-sign 
  Should Emacs use the GNU version of malloc?             yes
      (Using Doug Lea's new malloc from the GNU C Library.)
  Should Emacs use a relocating allocator for buffers?    yes
  Should Emacs use mmap(2) for buffer allocation?         no
  What window system should Emacs use?                    x11
  What toolkit should Emacs use?                          GTK
  Where do we find X Windows header files?                Standard dirs
  Where do we find X Windows libraries?                   Standard dirs
  Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 no
  Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   yes
  Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  yes
  Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  yes
  Does Emacs use a gif library?                           yes -lgif
  Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   yes
  Does Emacs use -lrsvg-2?                                yes
  Does Emacs use -lgpm?                                   no
  Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   yes

Mathias

On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 10:48 +0100, Dave Pawson wrote:
> Thanks Peter.
> 
> On 08/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
> > > Another package I'm missing perhaps?
> >
> >
> (lib)ncurses.
> 
> Thanks. A bit of googling led me to
> http://webusers.npl.uiuc.edu/~yangrz/Emacs.html
> 
> So, for a new Ubuntu install.
> 
> $apt-get install libc6-dev g++ libncurses5-dev
> $./configure
> $./make
> $./make install
> 
> did it for me.
> 
> Now executable... in a window... if you see what I mean?
> I'm getting the text based emacs from 10 years ago?
> What's happened to my nice 'semi-graphics' emacs please.
> source from http://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/emacs/emacs-22.1.tar.gz
> 
> Nearly,
> 
> 
> regards
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> help-gnu-emacs mailing list
> help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs
> 

Re: Building 22.1, on Ubuntu

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:13:07 +0200, Mathias Megyei <mathias@mnet-mail.de> wrote:
> I had to install more of the *-dev packages (libx11-dev,
> libungif-dev, libgtk-dev, ...).

Fantastic!

Now you have gtk-dev too, so Emacs will use the GTK+ `widgets' for
displaying its menu, context menus when you right-click with a mouse,
and neat GTK+ based buttons.

> Please look at the output of the configure run, whether
> configure has found all of the necessary libraries.
>
> The output from my last build (Emacs 23) looks as follows:
>
> Configured for `i686-pc-linux-gnu'.
>
>   Where should the build process find the source
> code?    /home/mathias/gnu/Emacs/emacs
>   What operating system and machine description files should Emacs use?
>         `s/gnu-linux.h' and `m/intel386.h'
>   What compiler should emacs be built with?               gcc -g -O2
> -Wno-pointer-sign
>   Should Emacs use the GNU version of malloc?             yes
>       (Using Doug Lea's new malloc from the GNU C Library.)
>   Should Emacs use a relocating allocator for buffers?    yes
>   Should Emacs use mmap(2) for buffer allocation?         no
>   What window system should Emacs use?                    x11
>   What toolkit should Emacs use?                          GTK
>   Where do we find X Windows header files?                Standard dirs
>   Where do we find X Windows libraries?                   Standard dirs
>   Does Emacs use -lXaw3d?                                 no
>   Does Emacs use -lXpm?                                   yes
>   Does Emacs use -ljpeg?                                  yes
>   Does Emacs use -ltiff?                                  yes
>   Does Emacs use a gif library?                           yes -lgif
>   Does Emacs use -lpng?                                   yes
>   Does Emacs use -lrsvg-2?                                yes
>   Does Emacs use -lgpm?                                   no
>   Does Emacs use X toolkit scroll bars?                   yes

This seems about right.

Now is the time to run `make distclean', or extract a clean tarball of
the Emacs sources and build everything with this latest version of a
build-environment you have installed.

Great progress :-)