sostrovsky at snip.net
Thu Nov 23 11:49:53 PST 2000
scott thomason wrote:
> You have got to be kidding. You mean all us sheep blindly plugged
> "--with-ncurses" in when simply omitting "--with-curses" would have
> done the job?
Not exactly. Depending what the "have done the job" is.
Configure script for bash really doesn't have a macro AC_ARG_WITH
for --with-ncurses, so using it equals to --with-foo, as Matthias noted, or
And it is assumed by default that --with-curses is set on, unless you
>From the other hand, the logic of the script checking for your particular flavor
of curses ( plain curses, ncurses, etc. ) is slightly broken.
I once had that "Can't find ncurses" or something.
I looked in configure script and decided as a "quick and dirty"
fix to remove my link curses.a->ncurses.a ( BTW, ncurses installed that link
on the first place ). It solved the problem.
This is not a "hint", because the result of running that broken snippet
of bash's configure depends on combination of existence ( or non existence ) 4
files : curses.h, ncurses.h, curses.a, ncurses.a
So, as always in this imperfect world, YMMV.
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev