On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 04:11:16PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Mon, 27 Sep 2004, Geoff wrote: > >>For > >>example, the user was not aware that there was a libxml2 > >>under the /usr/X11R6 tree as well as under the /usr/lib > >>tree. LibMagick was apparently built and tested with the > >>libxml2 under /usr/X11R6. > > > >I may be exposing more ignorance here, but that is not what > >I meant. At least in my case it seems (am I wrong?), that > >LibMagick was built with the libxml2 which was > >originally under /usr/lib. Thus my > > This does seem wrong.
Why? his system came with libxml2.$shared_ext in /usr/lib. he removed it and installed it in /usr/local/lib, without making sure the dependent packages were rebuilt. > As the author of ImageMagick's configure > script, I can tell you that the configure script uses settings from > whatever xml2-config script is discovered via the executable search > path so it is quite easy for a maintainer's environment to pick up and > use the wrong libxml2. Feel free to blame that on bad design. :-( > > This is worth reporting as a bug to your ImageMagick package > maintainer. why? it is not the fault of the maintainer, unless the official OS libxml2 package does not install libxml2.$shared_ext into /usr/lib. -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
