[blfs-support] xdg-utils - config.status: WARNING: 'scripts/Makefile.in' seems to ignore the --datarootdir setting - BLFS 8.2
christopher.gregory at mail.com
Sun Jun 17 18:00:23 PDT 2018
> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 3:00 PM
> From: "Ken Moffat" <zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com>
> To: "BLFS Support List" <blfs-support at lists.linuxfromscratch.org>
> Subject: Re: [blfs-support] xdg-utils - config.status: WARNING: 'scripts/Makefile.in' seems to ignore the --datarootdir setting - BLFS 8.2
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 04:24:37AM +0200, Christopher Gregory wrote:
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 12:25 PM
> > > From: rhubarbpieguy at gmail.com
> > > To: "BLFS Support (no HTML)" <blfs-support at linuxfromscratch.org>
> > > Subject: [blfs-support] xdg-utils - config.status: WARNING: 'scripts/Makefile.in' seems to ignore the --datarootdir setting - BLFS 8.2
> > >
> > >
> > > I receive "config.status: WARNING: 'scripts/Makefile.in' seems to ignore
> > > the --datarootdir setting" when compiling xdg-utils. Can this error be
> > > ignored?
> > >
> > > I also receive:
> > >
> > > xmlto:
> > > /compiler/xdg-utils-1.1.2/scripts/html/../desc/xdg-desktop-menu.xml does
> > > not validate (status 3)
> > > xmlto: Fix document syntax or use --skip-validation option
> > >
> > > I don't understand what's causing the error and I see no
> > > '--skip-validation' configuration option in xdg-utils or xmlto.
> > > Where/how do I skip validation? And if I do so, am I simply ignoring a
> > > problem?
> > >
> > Hello,
> > Your not the only one who had to fight this. I was getting the exact same error. I had to remove the system entries for docbook-4.5 docbookxml and re-install and re-create the catalogues. Only after I had
> > done that did this package successfully compile and install for me.
> In that case, the important question is "What differed between your
> original install and your revised install ?". No, I very much doubt
> that you are able to answer that (if it happened to me, I probably
> would not be able to), but understanding what changed will be key to
> working out why (at least) the two of you have had this problem.
> And Christopher - please don't mail me privately, since either your
> setup, or your mail provider, rejects my replies.
> Keyboard not found, Press F1 to continue
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
I have very very accurate install notes. I know exactly what was installed prior and after, and what failed to compile following inaccurate book instructions. Compilers do not lie, and I am well and truly able to copy and paste. I noticed add errors when re-installing and found that docbook etc are packages that have to be forcefully uninstalled. I just wanted to assist someone else with this. I also noticed that you complained that someone had not let blfs/lfs know that there was a problem with a package, and that they had reported it upstream. The reasons for that are very very clear to me. They do not like the lack of accurate checking and cross checking of packages. A minimum of 4 people should check package updates and book instructions are correct. Yet when people do report things, it is ignored because the people doing the checking do NOT have the pacakages out of optional installed and are not even using the init system in question so do not know what they are doing. You do not have to worry about me sending you any email off list Ken. I just thought a sysadmin may well want to get to the bottom of things so I forwarded you ONE reply I did onlist and another one. My private email server is set up the way I WANT, not the way others want it set up. As far as I am concerned, I will report packages upstream that do not compile without errors and I can guarantee, moving forward that I too will NOT report it here before or after. You people do NOT write the packages from scratch, only create instructions that can very easily be obtained reading the readme and install files in the source tree.
More information about the blfs-support