Re: libg++

2000-03-25 Thread Nick Barron
nevermind found what i needed!     - Original Message - From: Beavis To: debian list Sent: Friday, March 24, 2000 4:03 PM Subject: libg++ i am install StarOffice-3.1 from a tar because i could not find it in a deb format.   it say upon installation, can't lo

Re: libg++.so.27 where?

1999-03-22 Thread Sarel Botha
> Just a quick one, I am trying to get netscape 4.5 going on slink, it seems > to need libg++ 2.7, the old libs version on slink is 2.8. If you ever need a specific file, usually a lib like that, use the bottom search engine at www.debian.org/distrib/packages. I find it VERY useful and I have no i

Re: libg++.so.27 where?

1999-03-22 Thread E.L. Meijer \(Eric\)
> > Hello all, > > Just a quick one, I am trying to get netscape 4.5 going on slink, it seems > to need libg++ 2.7, the old libs version on slink is 2.8. > > Is this on hamm and will it do any damage installing it? If not, where can > I get it in a .deb? I think http://www.debian.org/Packages/

Re: libg++ for 1.1

1996-12-20 Thread joost witteveen
> > I am trying to build octave 2.0 on my 1.1 system. I did not have the c++ > libs (libg++), but if I get the new libg++, that depends on libc5.4, but I > have libc5.2. (I am assuming that my lack of the c++ libs is what is causing > the octave configure script to think my C++ compiler does not w

Re: libg++ for 1.1

1996-12-19 Thread Dale Scheetz
On Thu, 19 Dec 1996, Hunter Marshall wrote: > I am trying to build octave 2.0 on my 1.1 system. I did not have the c++ > libs (libg++), but if I get the new libg++, that depends on libc5.4, but I > have libc5.2. (I am assuming that my lack of the c++ libs is what is causing > the octave configure

Re: libg++-2.7.2.deb is old?

1996-09-11 Thread Mario Olimpio de Menezes
On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Amos Shapira wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: > |From: Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > |> In order to test a local copy of buzz-fixed before burning it on a > |> CD-ROM, we tried to run "dpkg --root=... --unpack", just to see if the > |> files aren't corru

Re: libg++-2.7.2.deb is old?

1996-09-11 Thread David Engel
Bruce Perens writes: > The libg++ doesn't compile with the ELF libc. That's why it's in that > state. I'm not sure what's happening with this - whether there is a > maintainer working on it or if we're just going to wait for GNU LIBC 6. What do you mean? libg++27-2.7.1-2 builds fine for me with l

Re: libg++-2.7.2.deb is old?

1996-09-10 Thread Bruce Perens
Me: > It's complaining that it can't find the interpreter for the > pre-installation script in the perl package. From: Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Which interpreter? When I run "dpkg -I" on the perl package I see only > #!/bin/sh scripts. And if it's missing (whatever it is) then what sho

Re: libg++-2.7.2.deb is old?

1996-09-10 Thread Amos Shapira
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: |From: Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |> In order to test a local copy of buzz-fixed before burning it on a |> CD-ROM, we tried to run "dpkg --root=... --unpack", just to see if the |> files aren't corrupted. |[...] |> Selecting previously deselected pack

Re: libg++-2.7.2.deb is old?

1996-09-10 Thread Bruce Perens
From: Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > In order to test a local copy of buzz-fixed before burning it on a > CD-ROM, we tried to run "dpkg --root=... --unpack", just to see if the > files aren't corrupted. [...] > Selecting previously deselected package perl. > Unpacking perl (from .../devel/perl_