Hi All,

I am using RedHat 7.0 and so thought I needed to rebuild the new LyX 1.2.0
Things seemed to go well ... until the end when the build process 
aborted with:

%   source='insetexternal.C' object='insetexternal.lo' libtool=yes \
%  depfile='.deps/insetexternal.Plo' tmpdepfile='.deps/insetexternal.TPlo' \
%  depmode=gcc /bin/sh ../../config/depcomp \
% /bin/sh ../../libtool --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. 
-I../../src -I./../ -I../.. -I../../boost  -isystem /usr/X11R6/include  
-O2 
% -march=i386 -mcpu=i686 -c -o insetexternal.lo `test -f insetexternal.C 
|| echo './'`insetexternal.C
% g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src -I./../ -I../.. -I../../boost 
-isystem /usr/X11R6/include -O2 -march=i386 -mcpu=i686 -c insetexternal.C
% -Wp,-MD,.deps/insetexternal.TPlo
% g++: Internal error: Segmentation fault (program cc1plus)

Do I need a new version of XForms on RH7.0, new ImageMagick, or what 
else to
do the build sucessfully  (without upgrading RedHat)?

I note in the 'rpm.README' it says 

"then you should have no problem compiling from the src.rpm."

What should I do next?
Regards
Thanks
Fred

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:

>After too long a wait, the LyX team are pleased to announce the new stable
>release, 1.2.0.
>
>This release has far too many bugfixes and new features to list
>comprehensively, but some are listed below.
>
>You can download LyX 1.2.0 here :
>
>       ftp://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/stable/lyx-1.2.0.tar.gz
>       ftp://ftp.devel.lyx.org/pub/lyx/lyx-1.2.0.tar.gz
>
>Prebuild binaries (mainly rpms for linux distributions) are available
>at
>       ftp://ftp.lyx.org/pub/lyx/bin/1.2.0/
>
>Note that there is no patch, due to the amount of changes.
> 
>If you find what you think is a bug in LyX 1.2.0, you may either
>e-mail the LyX user's mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), or open
>a bug report at http://bugzilla.lyx.org
>
>If you're having trouble using the new version of LyX, or have a question,
>first check out http://www.lyx.org/help/, and e-mail the LyX user's list if you
>can't find an answer there.  
> 
>


Reply via email to