xdmx problem

blum · 2006-09-05 15:24:00

Hello,
I wonder if you can help me with compiling of xorg-server. I get this message:

checking for LBXUTIL... yes
checking for DRIPROTO... yes
checking for LIBDRM... yes
checking for GL... yes
checking for XDMCP... yes
checking for XdmcpWrap in -lXdmcp... yes
checking for XSERVERCFLAGS... yes
checking for XSERVERLIBS... yes
checking if SVR4 needs to be defined... no
checking whether to build Xdmx DDX... checking for DMXMODULES... yes
configure: error: Xdmx build explicitly requested, but required
modules not found.
make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop.
==> ERROR: Build Failed. Aborting...

I dont have an idea where to get these xdmx modules from. Help?

<bennym> · 2006-09-05 16:16:28

why don't you use the pacman package?

pacman -Sy xorg

gs · 2006-09-05 19:27:12

If you want an experimental version, you could try activating your connection to the testing repository.

I, personally, would not want to try this latest version on arch64 until its run for a while on i686 and the 'experts' or 'keen assessors' have seen how it might 'slot' into arch64.

Remember that the whole xorg system involves lots of packages and that there is a lot of scope for bugs in any 'straight' conversion.

Geoff

blum · 2006-09-06 12:26:31

<bennym> wrote:

why don't you use the pacman package?
pacman -Sy xorg

Yes, I have it.. but I want to recompile it for my CPU. Wasting some time, for the science.

Geoff, you are right, but I'm trying to recompile the current version of xorg-server, not the "testing" one...

I'll try few more things, and I'll give it up..

gs · 2006-09-06 14:43:54

If you type ./configure --help , you will be able to seee the available options. You may be able to disable xdmx.

I am not experienced with this, but xdmx may be a daemon and a build dependency. Obviously, a daemon would need to be started.

So, these are some not so expert ideas?

Geoff

espo · 2006-09-06 15:02:49

hi blum if you can wait until friday evening i can take a look at it!
Because my archlinux station is a little bit far away.

Greetings
eSpo

gs · 2006-09-06 19:05:24

I've just had a look at the PKGBUILD. It is some mother of a build set-up... must take almost light years to build.

I'm scared!

If you want practice at makepkg'ing, that would look like real punishment. Giood luck, anyhow!

Geoff

chrismortimore · 2006-09-06 20:23:00

gs wrote:

I've just had a look at the PKGBUILD. It is some mother of a build set-up... must take almost light years to build.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_year It takes 9,460,528,404,879 km to build :shock: Scary stuff!

It isn't a particularly long build time on my Gentoo box, maybe an hour or so? I forget.

gs · 2006-09-06 22:19:41

I guess this would be the most involved makepkg process, within archlinux. Watching a term for an hour or so feels like an eternity, and that sort of (stoic) patience is what Gentoo involves. I guess that running Gentoo gives you experience at building a lot of stuff, and at being patient, too.

So, I was exercising some hyperbole. And you can see arch as being a sort of half-way house between Gentoo and the linuxes that you invariably install as binaries. Of course, there is nothing inapproriate in building from PKGBUILD... it's just that this one seems to be the most extreme instance.

Geoff

chrismortimore · 2006-09-07 08:14:37

Gentoo gives you all the time to do the little things in life you never normally have time to do. When a long emerge is in the works, you can have a bath, cook a meal for your loved ones, take a walk up a path you've never been up but always wondered what was up it, paint your house, watch the painted house dry, snuggle, that kinda thing. Really, Gentoo isn't so much a Linux distribution, it's a lifestyle manager

gs · 2006-09-07 13:44:36

The Gentoo install system is elegant, and everything gets mostly built from the bottom up, without prefabricated binary slabs. Philosophically speaking, it is fun to do it that way.

What can put people off, though, is the amount of work involved putting instructions into a term. But this is, after all, is the real power of most unix and linux distros. Mac doesn't easily let you work that way; and as for WinCrap -- that is death by exe files! (Except for wine, of course -- that is open source!)

Geoff

Arch Linux

#1 2006-09-05 15:24:00

xdmx problem

#2 2006-09-05 16:16:28

Re: xdmx problem

#3 2006-09-05 19:27:12

Re: xdmx problem

#4 2006-09-06 12:26:31

Re: xdmx problem

#5 2006-09-06 14:43:54

Re: xdmx problem

#6 2006-09-06 15:02:49

Re: xdmx problem

#7 2006-09-06 19:05:24

Re: xdmx problem

#8 2006-09-06 20:23:00

Re: xdmx problem

#9 2006-09-06 22:19:41

Re: xdmx problem

#10 2006-09-07 08:14:37

Re: xdmx problem

#11 2006-09-07 13:44:36

Re: xdmx problem

Board footer