I'm currently trying to build Lazarus 0.9.26 on Slackware 12.1, which appears to have a fairly clean set of gtk 2.0 libraries unlike Debian which has a lot of 1.2 stuff.

I think I need to create a manual symlink

libgdk_pixbuf.so -> libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so

However even with this I get:

Linking ../lazarus
/usr/local/share/lazarus-0.9.26-0/lcl/units/i386-linux/gtk/gtkdebug.o: In function `ONDBGDRAWAREAEXPOSE':
gtkdebug.pp:107: undefined reference to
`gdk_pixbuf_render_to_drawable_alpha'
/usr/local/share/lazarus-0.9.26-0/lcl/units/i386-linux/gtk/gtkproc.o: In function `CREATEPIXBUFFROMDRAWABLE':
gtkproc.inc:5624: undefined reference to `gdk_pixbuf_get_from_drawable' /usr/local/share/lazarus-0.9.26-0/lcl/units/i386-linux/gtk/gtkextra.o: In function `GDK_PIXBUF_RENDER_PIXMAP_AND_MASK':
gtk1extra.inc:497: undefined reference to
`gdk_pixbuf_render_pixmap_and_mask'
lazarus.pp(122,1) Error: Error while linking
lazarus.pp(122,1) Fatal: There were 1 errors compiling module, stopping Fatal: Compilation aborted
make[2]: *** [lazarus] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/share/lazarus-0.9.26-0/ide' make[1]: *** [ide] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/local/share/lazarus-0.9.26-0/ide' make: *** [ide] Error 2

Does anybody have any suggestions please?

Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote

Does anybody have any suggestions please?

Try

make LCL_PLATFORM=gtk2

Regards,

Andrew

Andrew Haines wrote

Try make LCL_PLATFORM=gtk2

Thanks Andrew, that's it. Don't need the original symlink either.

At which point I really do have to wonder why this is necessary if gtk2 is now the default, and in any case where it's documented?

Could a rule for "help" be grafted onto the makefile showing the important options and available targets?

Sorry, I'm trying :-)

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available
Url: http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20081024/e3129126/attachment.pl

My mistake. I assumed that since this ML announced that v2 was the new default without specifying a version number a week before it announced that 0.9.26 was now "current" that it applied.

Thanks, noted.

The makefile would be a bad and uncommon place for this information.

Sorry, with respect I disagree about the "uncommon" aspect. If you say "make help" in the Linux kernel build directory it gives you a list of targets etc., and in a fairly high proportion of open source projects "./configure --help" will give you a list of options.

Right you are.
And of course more help would be better.

Note: We don't want/need a './configure'. lazarus should compile for most users with a normal 'make'. If you need options then you are doing experimental stuff.

AFAIK: It is common to list some common options. But it is uncommon to explain those options there. The explanations and requirements are normally put into an Install or Readme file under Linux/BSD/C projects and some pdf/html/etc on other targets.
The make files were always a temporary solution. We always wanted a fp way to compile stuff. The coming fpmake will hopefully do the job. To make C and linux people feel home there will be a Makefile that will simply call fpmake.
And the sub make targets for lcl, components codetools, ... will be replaced/vanish too.
This will not happen in weeks, but maybe in a few months.

Mattias

Mattias Gaertner wrote

Note: We don't want/need a './configure'. lazarus should compile for most users with a normal 'make'.

Definitely, I only mentioned ./configure because it's the other way that build options are normally applied.

Perhaps some static make targets (i.e. at least "make help") which output a URL to the relevant bit of the wiki?