Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] ardour Q
From: D. Stimits (stimits_AT_idcomm.com)
Date: Thu Jul 19 2001 - 22:41:46 EEST
Paul Davis wrote:
>
> >I was unable to reach the address listed in Ardour's author file, and
>
> why? what was the error?
Looks like it was a typo error on my side. I sent to:
pdb_AT_op.net
But required "pbd" not "pdb". :(
Digits transposed, it bounced saying "no user" (my fault).
>
> >wondered if maybe someone here could answer an install question on it?
> >Basically, I have libsndfile installed via rpm, and I can guarantee it
> >exists:
> ># ldconfig -p | grep libsndfile
> > libsndfile.so.0 (libc6) => /usr/lib/libsndfile.so.0
> > libsndfile.so.0 (libc6) => /usr/local/lib/libsndfile.so.0
> >
> >Yet ./configure is broken for ardour-0.99.8:
> >checking for main in -lsndfile... no
> >configure: error: **** ardour requires libsndfile, but it doesn't appear
> >to be installed
>
> <nice response>
> you probably don't have the libsndfile-devel RPM installed, which
> includes the things you'd need to actually *compile* applications
This is probably it then...I have the lib but not the devel.
>
> anyway, in general, to see whats wrong when configure fails, you need
> to remember to look at the end of config.log, which will provide some
> clues, if not to you, then to others.
Hadn't thought of it. automake/autoconf is not my strong area, I ended
up abandoning it due to difficulties of mixing C and C++ in the same
project, and never went back to it.
> </nice response>
>
> <not-so-nice response>
>
> Please, would people stop using RPM's or any package system for that
> matter to install libraries that they need to use with applications
> that they have to compile from source? It causes so many problems. If
> you are building a tool from source and it needs library X, I
> energetically encourage you to fetch and install library X as a source
> tarball. This will ensure several things:
I normally do use rpm if I can, but was born a slackware type, so
tarballs are my "natural" form when needed. In this case, it is not an
rpm problem...the error message did not mention the devel package.
Looking closer, including the config.log, the error looks to be in error
itself:
configure:1758: checking for main in -lsndfile
configure:1773: gcc -o conftest -g -O2 -Xlinker -rpath -Xlinker
libs/lib conftest.c -lsndfile -Llibs/lib -lsigc -lpthread 1>&5
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lsndfile
I say the error in the log is itself in error because I can easily
compile and use -lsndfile. ldconfig -p shows it. I don't know why
configure can't find it, but the gist is that without regard to any
headers or anything else, it is the actual lib that can't be
found...which is plain nuts, it is there. My guess is that the step
failed for some other reason, and all reasons of failure are being
blamed on missing -lsndfile.
But I will take the advice and try with all source packages and also try
to find the libsndfile-devel and not just libsndfile. I assume there is
probably a header or something related, beyond -lsndfile, causing
failure.
In the case of rpm's, the source version of rpm is good to work with;
using --rebuild will compile the source and respec it; install of the
rpm will give you the source tree and any patches if someone decides to
distribute patches with it. On the other hand, it is a lot of work to
support rpm's, which really sucks if the packages get released very
often.
D. Stimits, stimits_AT_idcomm.com
>
> 1) that you really do have all the things the library needs,
> rather than just the things someone mentioned in the spec
> file.
> 2) that the things the library needs actually exist, rather than
> being listed in a package database.
> 3) that the libraries are compiled with the same compiler
> and against the same header files that the rest of the
> application will be.
>
> RPMs can be a cool way to install applications, especially statically
> linked ones. They are a PITA for libraries far too much of the time.
>
> </not-so-nice-response>
>
> >I have tried manually forcing a check in the right directory with the
> >--libdir option, but no go. Possibly ardour does not like my libsndfile
> >version, but fails to give enough information about that to really know.
>
> >Does anyone here have a version of ardour that works with Redhat 7.1? Or
> >a way to force configure to accept the fact that libsndfile really is
> >there?
>
> DO NOT ATTEMPT TO USE RH7.X for compiling C++ applications that were
> not developed on RH7.1. The problems involved in doing this are
> immense. If you're really interested, join the ardour-dev mailing
> list, where some other people who have tried it (and i think one of
> them succeeded) can help you out.
>
> --p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jul 19 2001 - 22:42:50 EEST