directfb

rblythe rblythe714 at comcast.net
Sun Sep 30 10:20:20 PDT 2007


Barry Loo wrote:
> Directfb is a minimal X substitute that requires several hundred
> _fewer_ packages to be built ( and maintain in the blfs book ).  I'm
> actually requesting that directfb be added to the blfs book--I think
> it would benefit many users besides me.
>
> I will eventually contact the directfb and gtk+-directfs myself and
> figure out how to build them from source.  I posted to this list
> before doing so for three reasons: first, ya'll are the build from
> source experts; second, it would make blfs better for everyone; third,
> back in the blfs 5.xsomthin' days, directfb build intructions did
> exist.
>
> But in answer to your question:
> 1) My build is based on several versions of lfs, blfs, diy_linux, my
> own scripts ( including my own patches and sed fixes ), and build
> instructions I found online
> 2) On my last attempt I couldn't build pango--it didn't detect that I
> had glib or cairo on my system ( on earlier attempts I made it to the
> actual directfb build; but, I don't recall the error )
> 3) Yes, in addition to '2)' above, I can't figure out exactly what
> those dependencies are.  Let me clarify: on
> www.directfb.org/wiki/index.php/Projects:GTK_on_DirectFB   a tutorial
> is written describing how to build from _source_; however, those
> instructions require running apt-get to get the source and the binary
> packages needed to install them.  And there is something about
> _developer tools_, too.
> 3.5) In preemtive response to a possible future question, I'm using
> the newest stable versions of atk, cairo, glib, and pango ( not
> necessarily the versions from blfs ).
> 4) Yes, along with fusion
>
> Loo
>
>   
<snip>

After looking at this site:
http://www.directfb.org/wiki/index.php/Projects:GTK_on_DirectFB#Compiling_GTK-DFB_applications_-_the_GIMP
(I am not including this for your benefit, I am just showing you what I 
looked at.  I know you have already reviewed this information)

I see that it does show things like program program-dev packages.  When 
building from source code, *everything* is built and I believe that is 
because we do not provide specific make targets (in essence we make all 
when we issue the make and make install commands).  My suggestion is to 
get the packages that they list on the directFB website (source code) 
and build it normally.  You will then have executables and "development" 
information on your system.

And as for adding to BLFS - My suggestion would be to make this a hint 
once you get it built successfully.  Then if others are interested they 
can review your hint.  If enough interest is generated and the hint 
consistently build after it is tested, perhaps the BLFS Team (remember I 
do not speak for them) may consider it.

Lastly, I wasn't around for the BLFS 5.xx days, but I believe if it was 
removed by the developers, I'm sure they have good reasons.

Also, I would look at your build scripts and sed commands.  And do you 
have pkg-config installed? Maybe there is an "--enable-xxx" or 
"--with-yyy" that needs to be added to your configure in order to get it 
to build properly.

rblythe



More information about the blfs-support mailing list