Checkinstall and Compiling

cwwilson721 · 06-25-2006, 02:00 AM

I believe I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwwilson721

The ./configure script,through other libs and programs, and by options passed by the user, determines the actual compile process. For example, the cpu class, what libs are required, etc.

(Bold type added by me to show the line)

egag · 06-25-2006, 09:55 AM

example :
(for i686 cpu and "O2" optimization)

Code:

 
$export CFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686 -mtune=i686"
$export CXXFLAGS=$CFLAGS
./configure
make
checkinstall

type "man gcc" for all the options.

egag

evilDagmar · 06-25-2006, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cwwilson721

I believe I said

Bold type added by me to show the line)

...and you also said "Rather than that, evilDagmar, how about 'That seems to be correct'." in answer to the user's question which is, was, and shall remain incorrect.

jimX86 · 06-25-2006, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilDagmar

...and you also said "Rather than that, evilDagmar, how about 'That seems to be correct'." in answer to the user's question which is, was, and shall remain incorrect.

OMG, give it a rest!

One really funny thing though...this morning you accused cwwilson of editing his post to make himself look better. I was reading the thread at the time, and he basically just continued a thought. It was done before the next post was entered. (And his advice to you was solid.)

OTOH, I noticed that you edited out your most childish remark about having the last word. (I can't remember whether that was your edited post #9, or your edited post #13.) As opposed to cwwilson's edit, you actually changed the content of your message, and by doing so probably avoided yet another altercation with a moderator.

So as usual, you're twice as guilty of the very thing that you are accusing other people of doing.

cwwilson721 · 06-25-2006, 08:09 PM

THANK YOU!

I have added the offending poster to my ignore list. Now, I don't even worry about his childish and petulant antics.

Sorry and many apologies to the OP for this unfortunate turn of events. All of us at LQ strive for the utmost in professionalism and tact.

However, as in most orginizations, there is the '1%' that do not.

Again, apologies to you, tubatodd, for this unfortunate incident. I assure you, it will not happen on my part again.

tubatodd · 06-25-2006, 08:40 PM

I couldn't help but remember a very famous Rodney King quote throughout this thread.

That's ok for the distraction. Maybe you can help me out with 3 other problems then.

1st: I can't seem to get Kscreensaver to operate properly. I have the clock chosen to load after 5 minutes of down time. Unfortunately, it does not start as it should.

2nd: I downloaded and installed what appears to be a GREAT handy program (for a band director like myself) called Tuneroid. The Slack package installed just fine, BUT everytime I load the program it says that there is an ALSA error loading the "proper device". According to ALSA itself and a practical test ("test..test....test one") my mic works fine.

3rd: I can't get my mouse scroll wheel to work. I have read a ton of posts about it and everytime I try "IMPS/2" my mouse goes haywire. Sooooo, I need instructions on how to get the wheel to work using the "PS/2" driver (which works).

Thanks

***EDIT**

ROOOOLLLL TIDE ROLL!

evilDagmar · 06-25-2006, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimX86

OMG, give it a rest!

One really funny thing though...this morning you accused cwwilson of editing his post to make himself look better. I was reading the thread at the time, and he basically just continued a thought. It was done before the next post was entered. (And his advice to you was solid.)

Actually, I didn't accuse him of anything more specific than editing his post after I'd responded to it. Am I actually supposed to have taken a response that consisted entirely of "And" and "Hmm..." seriously?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimX86

OTOH, I noticed that you edited out your most childish remark about having the last word. (I can't remember whether that was your edited post #9, or your edited post #13.) As opposed to cwwilson's edit, you actually changed the content of your message, and by doing so probably avoided yet another altercation with a moderator.

I would argue that by changing his post to actually include points of argument that he also changed the content of his message.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimX86

So as usual, you're twice as guilty of the very thing that you are accusing other people of doing.

Excepting that he did it first, and then I did it specifically because he did it. It's obvious that no amount of commentary will ever get cwwilson to admit that he was wrong about anything, so you'll pardon me if I don't really care how my comments to him are recieved. There's no "as usual" to it. He did it, I called him on it, and since no one seems to care that he did it, that would apparently mean that it's okay for me and everyone else to do it as well. Please, feel free to explain why there's a double-standard here. You're calling me on it, but not him. Why?

evilDagmar · 06-25-2006, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubatodd

3rd: I can't get my mouse scroll wheel to work. I have read a ton of posts about it and everytime I try "IMPS/2" my mouse goes haywire. Sooooo, I need instructions on how to get the wheel to work using the "PS/2" driver (which works).

So it's pretty clearly not a Microsoft Intellimouse then. Mice with more than the basic two buttons and a wheel aren't quite so guaranteed to be compatible with that driver. Specifically what type of mouse is it? Getting it working may be as simple as actually telling it "ExplorerPS/2" and specifying the ZAxis instructions. (Actually, if it's an "explorer" mouse go ahead and try that.)

...and I'm very sure you've seen the following before (unless you'te having us on about "a ton of posts"), but here it is again:

Code:

Section "InputDevice"
         Identifier  "Mouse0"
         Driver      "mouse"
         Option      "Protocol" "ExplorerPS/2"
         Option      "Device" "/dev/psaux"
         Option      "Buttons"       "5"
         Option      "ZAxisMapping"  "4 5"

The zaxismapping and buttons directives should generally work no matter which specific driver is invoked, but getting the right driver will always work better than a "compatible enough" driver.

jimX86 · 06-25-2006, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilDagmar

You're calling me on it, but not him. Why?

Because you deleted comments that portrayed you in an accurate yet unflattering manner. He didn't. See the difference?

Look, I don't want you to take this as an admission of defeat on my part, but I'm not going to respond to you further. I don't know if you're trolling, or if you just don't get it... either way I can't be bothered.

evilDagmar · 06-25-2006, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimX86

Because you deleted comments that portrayed you in an accurate yet unflattering manner. He didn't. See the difference?

As I said in the private email, the only difference is that I'm at least honest enough to make it clear when I'm being flip and dismissive. I actually spent a few moments carefully studying his post in order to craft the perfect identical response.

Stik · 06-25-2006, 09:59 PM

I must be a freaking moron because all I have to say to all this is "heh"

gnashley · 06-26-2006, 01:00 AM

Returning to the original subject. I've written what I think is a better alternative to checkinstall:

http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/...9-noarch-1.tgz

Try it for all your packaging and difficult sources.

unSpawn · 06-26-2006, 06:20 AM

//Moderator.note: @evilDagmar and @cwwilson721: I do appreciate both you helping out your fellow LQ members, but by now I have seen enough thread hijacking from the both of you. Please cease this arguing over details where it does not serve to alleviate the OP's problem or to correct fellow LQ members in a respectful and factual way.

This also means I also do not want to see any discussion about this, nor comments, nor any hinting at in any of our LQ fora as well as signature's, blogs or whatever else. It would be best for you both to do some cooling down and stay out of threads the other already posted in.

If you want to discuss this then please take it up with me by email.
Please note non-compliance is something moderators will remedy decisively and RSN.