All, 

Thanks for the quick responses! I regenerated the configure script as suggested:

gtk_modules="$gtk_package >= $gtk_min_version glib-2.0 >= 2.28"
gtk_modules_private="gio-2.0 >= 2.28 gmodule-no-export-2.0"

And it looks like most of this compiled! 

It failed here however because G_TYPE_KEY_FILE was not defined:
  CC     libgeany_la-geanyobject.lo


I tried hacking up a quick solution by putting this at the top of geanyobject.cc:

#include <glib-object.h>
#define G_TYPE_KEY_FILE (g_key_file_get_type ())

but this caused a linker failure. 

libgeany sounds like a pretty important library so there's probably not a way for me to easily get around this. 



On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Matthew Brush <mbrush@codebrainz.ca> wrote:
On 2016-12-06 08:00 PM, Asif Aaron Amin wrote:
All,

When I try to build the latest geany (version 1.29) from source I get the
following configure error:

checking for GTK... no
configure: error: Package requirements (gtk+-2.0 >= 2.24 glib-2.0 >= 2.32
gio-2.0 >= 2.32 gmodule-no-export-2.0) were not met:

Requested 'glib-2.0 >= 2.32' but version of GLib is 2.28.8
Requested 'gio-2.0 >= 2.32' but version of GIO is 2.28.8

Is it possible to get past these constraints besides installing the latest
glib libraries? I'm currently using version 1.27 and I was able to build
from source flawlessly. I feel bad that I'm not using the bleeding edge
geany version anymore. Geany is my favorite text editor and I like to get
the new goodies from each new release!


 You could change `2.32` here and the next line to `2.28.8` and then fix what breaks. I think it's not a lot that requires `2.32` [0].

https://github.com/geany/geany/blob/1.29.0/configure.ac#L73

Would it be possible to relax these constraints in future possibly?


 I think it would be a valid Issue[1] to request re-synchronizing the GTK+ and GLib version numbers. If we only check for GTK+ `2.24.0` then we should probably only require GLib `2.27.3` like GTK+ itself (debatable).

https://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/configure.in?h=2.24.0#n34

Most likely a clean patch/pull request to resolve the mismatch would be accepted.


Regards,
Matthew Brush

[0]: https://github.com/geany/geany/commit/314a5c180ee6489248e9f94306a53ab623d68178#diff-67e997bcfdac55191033d57a16d1408aR77
[1]: https://github.com/geany/geany/issues/new

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.geany.org
https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users