installing fluxbox source file into redhat 9.0

Haraldsh · 09-04-2003, 02:18 AM

Hi!
I'm having some difficulty finding out what is the problem with fluxbox.

I've come so far as make install, but that's it.

I'm given a weird message when make install is trying to install
a catalog:

"Installing catalog in /usr/local/share/fluxbox/nls/c
In: creating symbolic link '/usr/local/share/fluxbox/nls/US_ASCII to 'C': Operation not permitted
In: creating symbolic link '/usr/local/share/fluxbox/nls/POSIX to 'C': Operation not permitted
In: creating symbolic link '/usr/local/share/fluxbox/nls/en_US to 'C': Operation not permitted
In: creating symbolic link '/usr/local/share/fluxbox/nls/en_US to 'C': Operation not permitted
make[3]: *** [install-data-local] Error 1
make[3]: *** [install-am] Error 2
make[3]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory '/root/filer/fluxbox-0.1.14/nls'
make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1"

There were alot of other things, but I've only written what seemed to be faulty.

Hey, remember I'm quite the newbie, so in layman terms, when you tell me something.

Thanks

footfrisbee · 09-04-2003, 03:13 AM

I noticed in the latest release of fluxbox that the nls support is broken, so if you don't need it just run
$ ./configure --disable-nls
$ make

Hangdog42 · 09-04-2003, 07:21 AM

It also could be that you don't have permission to write to those directories. Are you su or root when you make install?

Haraldsh · 09-04-2003, 08:14 AM

I found out the problem...
I've put a fat32 in the usr/local section...

And to make it worse, I had not made it possible to R/W....
(You were right Hangdog42).

It works now... thank you for helping.

I want to make the note, that Redhat is kinda hard to figure out, when you're trying to configure it.... and when updating..
I know that Debian is much more preferred than Redhat because of its ability to apt-get and so on.
The next thing now is to setup the wireless network....
I'm using redhat on a T30 2366-92G.
I know there are sites that have solved that topic.. but I'm a newbie so it will take a while before I have everything up and running.

Risc91 · 09-04-2003, 09:13 AM

You can use atp-get on your Redhat box, you just have to install it.

http://apt.freshrpms.net/

I just got wireless working on my T22. What wireless card are you using? Maybe I can lend a hand.

Hangdog42 · 09-04-2003, 09:16 AM

Quote:

I found out the problem...
I've put a fat32 in the usr/local section...
And to make it worse, I had not made it possible to R/W....
(You were right Hangdog42).

Hmm. I'm not sure I should take credit for that. I was right, but for the wrong reasons. I was thinking that you were trying to write to a directory that you, as a normal user, didn't have permission to write to, not that the whole partition didn't have write permission... Oh well, at least you figured it out!

Quote:

I want to make the note, that Redhat is kinda hard to figure out, when you're trying to configure it.... and when updating..

That's the exact reason I switched from RH to Slackware. Best decision I ever made!

Haraldsh · 09-05-2003, 01:48 AM

To Risc91
The card is a High Rate Wireless Lan Mini-PCI Adapter with Modem II.
At least it's not a Cisco (although I'd preferred it).

So there you go..

By the way, how do you install the apt files, there aren't
any faq about it though, so I would appreciate it if you could point me to a place that has one.

Haraldsh · 09-05-2003, 01:53 AM

To Hangdog42:
Isn't Slackware hard to setup?
It seems to me that you have to know much about Linux to use it.
My friends at the university prefer Debian, and they think it's better than redhat because of apt-get and several other small matters.

I have tried to install Debian, but I got stuck every time I tried to set it up, so I gave it up and instead I went to redhat.
(By the way, I purchased a book called "Mastering Redhat" (Amazon), so I'm not switching for a while, (I'm still waiting for the book)).

Hangdog42 · 09-05-2003, 07:27 AM

Is Slackware hard to set up? Not really. However, it doesnt' do the hand-holding that distros like Red Hat or Mandrake do. What you do need is a reasonably complete list of your hardware . You need to know what kind of video card, video RAM, main RAM, ethernet card, modem, monitor (including refresh rates) and then you're good to go. The Slackware install process does a pretty good job of detecting your hardware, but it does leave it to you to provide the details around that hardware.

I used to run Red Hat, and I've never made a better decision than switching to Slackware. Slackware seems put toghether in a more logical fashion (at least to me) and the locations of things inside the various system directories seems to be more standard than Red Hat. Furthermore, dumping rpms and using either Slacware packages (.tgz) or compiling myself (usually my first choice) has made linux much less frustrating for me. I used to loathe dependency hell, but with a complete Slackware install, I rarely run into dependency problems anymore.

When I first installed Slackware, I didn't know much about linux. I do now. It's a great way to learn linux.