guile-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

guile 2.0.7 installation problems: configure issues libltdl error


From: msematman
Subject: guile 2.0.7 installation problems: configure issues libltdl error
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2012 17:41:27 +0100

Dear all,

I am a non-root user on a 64bit machine.
I have been trying to install guile 2.0.7 from the tarball.

After ordinary ./configure --prefix=$HOME/local or even just ./configure
did not work, I have
tried with:
CC=gcc LDFLAGS="-L/usr/lib64/" ./configure --prefix=$HOME/local

First few lines of the configure output:
*******************************************

checking for a BSD-compatible install... 
    The current directory must be set to the ITT directory.
    Change the default to the ITT directory and re-run
    this script.
        
/usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking build system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
...
...
...

Last line of configure output:
********************************
...
...
...
checking for libltdl... no

and an error is issued complaining about the absence of libltdl.

However, libltdl exists on the system:
****************************
ls -l /usr/lib64/*ltdl*

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root    16 Nov 21  2011 /usr/lib64/libltdl.so.3 ->
libltdl.so.3.1.4
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 29952 Dec 16  2009 /usr/lib64/libltdl.so.3.1.4


Why does the configure step break down? Is the library too old?

A remark. The following snippet,

     "checking for a BSD-compatible install... 
         The current directory must be set to the ITT directory.
         Change the default to the ITT directory and re-run
         this script."

occurs because the IDL is in my PATH as well, and it contains 
an executable named install. I don't know if this confused the configure
script. 
It seems not.


Kind regards


-- 
  
  address@hidden



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]