Re: Headers missing from PIL?

On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 07:27:39PM -0800, Andy Grimberg wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-02-29 at 16:37, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > Packages are ready and skencil tested on FC1 (as far as I can test
> > such an application. I guess the test would rate as modern art, so it
> > passed ;).
> > 
> > The upload is scheduled to happen within one or two hours.
> 
> Thank you :)
> 
> I've given it a bit of a run and while it works... some things are a
> little off in the package itself.  All of the programs are installed
> with .py extensions and you've managed to avoid installing mkfontdb.py
> (the only executable that's always been a .py) and the sketch symlink. 

Hm, that's what the setup.py install did. After that I symlinked all
*.py from /usr/lib/skecil-0.6.16/*.px to /usr/bin/:

# rpm -ql skencil | grep /usr/bin
/usr/bin/sk2ppm.py
/usr/bin/sk2ps.py
/usr/bin/skconvert.py
/usr/bin/skencil.py
/usr/bin/skshow.py

mkfontdb.py was not installed. Does it require special
BuildRequirements? I used all I found in documenattion and in the
output of the build process.

> I know it's a bit nit picky, but believe me when I did the same thing
> originally the devs kicked up a bit of a storm ;) (ok the sketch symlink
> wasn't an issue at that time).
> 
> Out of curiosity did you take a look at the included .spec file that the
> tarball had?  It only needed the Source line fixed as well as the build
> and install dependencies.

Not yet, it was late yesterday, when I saw it and early today. :)
I will look at at and see what differences are (other than the
alternate installation path for include files).

Thanks.
--

-- 
Axel.Thimm <at> physik.fu-berlin.de