On Sun, Aug 23, 1998 at 05:16:50PM -0700, Matt McLean wrote: > On 23 Aug 1998, Rob Browning wrote: > > > > > FWIW, I tried to build apt, and it died during the configure stage > > with an SLang problem. After I hacked configure.in, it got past that > > stage, but it ends up needing libg++ which it looks like isn't > > available yet. Is that a major sticking point right now? > > nothing should be requiring libg++.. the c++ compiler should know to use > libstdc++. does configure really check for libg++? or just a working c++ > compiler (which is what it should be doing)? libg++ is only kept around > for compatibility (which IMO we don't really need since we're making a > jump from an incompatible libc).
I had gotten apt and g++ and friends to work; i'll try again - maybe tonight even. Dan
