| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
EEPS
n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 71
Location: Orangevale, CA
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:10 am Post subject: GNU LilyPond Build Fail |
 |
|
I am trying to install Lilypond from portage, but the build fails. I get this error:
| Code: |
cc1plus: warning: command line option "-Wmissing-prototypes" is valid for C/ObjC but not for C++
In file included from interval.cc:10:
include/interval.hh: In member function `T Interval_t<T>::center() const':
include/interval.hh:29: error: there are no arguments to `elem' that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of `elem' must be available
include/interval.hh:29: error: (if you use `-fpermissive', G++ will accept your code, but allowing the use of an undeclared name is deprecated)
|
and a bunch more of the same stuff, and finaly stops at:
| Code: |
make[1]: *** [out/interval.o] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/lilypond-2.0.3/work/lilypond-2.0.3/flower'
make: *** [all] Error 2
!!! ERROR: media-sound/lilypond-2.0.3 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 51, Exitcode 2
!!! emake failed
|
any one else try emerging this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
droterdam
n00b
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 6
Location: Brazil
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pafnoutios
n00b
Joined: 24 Dec 2004
Posts: 15
Location: Spokane, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, WAY too old!
I used an extra-portaged ebuild to install 2.6.5.
2.6 now can use UTF-8 for international characters in lyrics (that was my big reason for not staying with 2.5). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maartenstorm
n00b
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
Posts: 46
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As long as there is no up-to-date lilypond in portage I should download the 2.8.0. package installer from http://www.lilypond.org/web/install/#2.8
Maarten.
EDIT:
I just saw there is an ebuild for 2.8.0 in portage! I should try emerging that one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lmeadors
n00b
Joined: 24 Nov 2002
Posts: 24
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
So, WTH?
Why is such an ancient one (that doesn't build) marked as stable, and a newer one that does build marked as unstable?
That seems bass-ackwards to me... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BRPXQZME
Apprentice
Joined: 23 Mar 2006
Posts: 163
Location: Centreville, VA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Because in the past that one did build and the newer one needed testing....
...but I guess no one tested it? (version bump get!)
_________________
Firefox is spelled F-i-r-e-f-o-x - only the first letter capitalized (i.e. not FireFox, not Foxfire, FoxFire or whatever else a number of folk seem to think it to be called.) The preferred abbreviation is "Fx" or "fx".
FF = Final Fantasy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Desktop Environments
