Re: [Denemo-devel] building on an old system again - error

[Bric]

On 06/10/2014 07:30 AM, Richard Shann wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 07:16 -0400, Bric wrote:
> > On 06/09/2014 11:51 PM, Bric wrote:
> > > On 06/09/2014 11:16 PM, Bric wrote:
> > > > On 06/09/2014 02:45 AM, Bric wrote:
> > > > > Hi, guys!
> > > > >
> > > > > Here I go again, with an ancient Ubuntu 10.10 (I've upgraded my main
> > > > > system to Ubuntu 14.04, but would like to build denemo on a
> > > > > different, old system because it also has some apps built with
> > > > > ancient code which is out of maintenance and not forward-compatible).
> > > > >
> > > > > So, I managed to ./configure the latest git on the old Ubuntu 10.10,
> > > > > but "make" errors out, apparently because my libglib is too old.  Or
> > > > > am I wrong?  Below is the error message.
> > > > >
> > > > > My libglib2.0-0 is version 2.26.1-0ubuntu1.  What are my options?
> > > > > Thanks in advance.
> > > > Anyone?  Am I correct in my assessment that this is a libglib version
> > > > problem?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What's the highest denemo version that works with libglib-2.26 ?
> > > I think I just determined that the error starts with version
> > > 1.1.2      Version 1.1.0  seems to compile and run OK.
> > And as far as the downloadable binaries, version 1.1.2 and 1.1.4
> > segfault when launched.
> Is it a 32-bit or 64-bit system?

32-bit

> > But I do wonder, in my API developer ignorance:  could the binaries be
> > made compatible here if, for instance, some functions where statically
> > linked/compiled, as opposed to dynamically?
> essentially it is as if they were linked statically. That is to say,
> they include their own versions of glib and so on, rather than trying to
> use unknown system ones.

I don't understand - are you saying these binaries are already 
statically compiled?   Or are you saying yes to the idea that they can 
be made more so? That one could compile executables of the latest 
versions that would run on old systems, because the newer functions 
would be internally contained?