Since the PPA 0.140 doesn't have TLS/SSL support, I am attempting to
compile this from the source
I am using ./configure --with-gnutls
OS: *buntu 184.108.40.206
checking for GLIB - version >= 2.17.6... no
*** Could not run GLIB test program, checking why...
*** The test program failed to compile or link. See the file config.log
*** exact error that occurred. This usually means GLIB is incorrectly
per synaptic libglib-2.0-0 is installed
You probably are missing libglib2.0-dev, and the same goes for any other library you want to build against. The build script is complaining about not finding the headers, and in debian-based systems at least, these files always go in the -dev packages.
DLSauers posted on Mon, 14 Nov 2016 14:14:26 +0000 as excerpted:
> On Mon, 14 Nov 2016 14:26:27 +0100, Daniel Berjón Díez wrote:
>> You probably are missing libglib2.0-dev, and the same goes for any
>> other library you want to build against. The build script is
>> complaining about not finding the headers, and in debian-based systems
>> at least, these files always go in the -dev packages.
> I figured as much, but those kinds of vague errors is why I have a
> disdain for compiling...
It's simply because your distro is setup and optimized as a binary
distro, with lib packages split into the main/runtime package and the -
devel/build-time package, which in turn is because it's optimized for
users, probably the majority, that don't do their own builds.
For a distro that makes other assumptions, namely, that users will be
building packages themselves, this split makes much less sense as the
assumption then is that both the runtime and buildtime components of the
upstream library will be needed on the system, so they might as well be
managed as a single package instead of artificially split into two
packages, as most of the binary-based distros tend to do.
As such, if you run this second sort of distro, arch and gentoo being the
biggest examples, this problem disappears and compiling is much simpler.
As to which of the two you might choose to run, the larger part of that
discussion is out of scope for this post, but the one difference that
applies here is that gentoo expects you to build all updates yourself
(for the most part it's easy as the build scripts automate all the
building and dependency pullins for you), even if you do an initial
binary install, while arch remains a core-binary distro with core
packages that you don't have to build yourself, with only the packages at
the margins being build-yourself, but because the assumption is that you
will indeed be building /some/ packages yourself and thus will need the
build-time headers, etc, AFAIK they don't split even their binary core
packages, so there's no second package to worry about installing when
you /do/ go to build something.
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman