[scribus] no odt support???

Rolf-Werner Eilert eilert-sprachen at t-online.de
Thu Jun 26 16:29:54 CEST 2008

Plinnell schrieb:
> On Thursday 26 June 2008 14:34:05 John Culleton wrote:
>> On Wednesday 25 June 2008 03:25:35 am Craig Bradney wrote:
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> Subject: Re: [scribus] no odt support???
>>>> From: Rolf-Werner Eilert <eilert-sprachen at t-online.de>
>>>> To: cbradney at zipworld.com.au,"Scribus User Mailing List"
>>> <scribus at lists.scribus.net>
>>>> Date: 25-06-2008 8:40
>>>> Craig Bradney schrieb:
>>>>> Theres nothing wrong with the source that I can see...
>>>>> before you run configure, please run
>>>>> make -f Makefile.svn
>>>>> as per:
>>>>> http://docs.scribus.net/index.php?lang=en&page=install3
>>>>> I have just gone through and tested many scenarious of code,
>>>>> missing
>>> includes,
>>>>> incorrect autohell versions etc, with the tarball and had all
>>>>> of the mentioned issues. Running the make -f line fixed it in
>>>>> one go with no workarounds.
>>>>> Craig
>>>> Even if it's not the svn version, Craig? I got the ordinary
>>>> source of the stable to compile.
>>> Having not used autohell for awhile it took me awhile to go through
>>> the elimination process last night. I finally remembered we had
>>> issues like this in the past and it was because the person had not
>>> run make -f Makefile.svn. It will depend on your system as to
>>> whether you need this or not, I found I always had to run it in the
>>> past.
>>> Use cmake.. you hair wont go grey, and you wont be pulling it out
>>> at every call to configure. No nasty spells required either.
>>> Craig
>> The instructions for cmake describe a more complex and for me at least
>> confusing process than the traditional process. I recognize that the
>> developers see virtues in cmake. But perhaps after development is
>> completed the install process could be boiled down to the usual
>> method for us busy folks that keep many Open Source products on our
>> systems.  If every product develops its own unique installation
>> software then life becomes unnecessarily complex.  I have seen other
>> products (Inkscape as I recall) follow other paths looking for the
>> ideal installation system. But for the end user the ideal method is
>> something that works and is reasonably simple and universal.
> Yes, and that is why Inkscape has started to migrate to Cmake as well. :)
>> Other Open Source products (e.g Gimp) compile and install nicely with
>> ./configure
>> make
>> make install
>> and have for many years.  And Scribus used to.
> Hmm..
> cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/path/whereyouwant/scribus
> make
> make install
> Not so complicated to me and the error messages are readable by mere humans.
>> I keep multiple versions of Scribus installed by the simple expedient
>> of putting the source of each version in a separate directory and
>> renaming the executable of the older versions with e.g. scribus11.
>> So I don't see any virtue in cmake to the end user.
> For starters:
> Faster
> Better clearer error messages
> Cross platform It works on Windows/OSX/Linux
> Easier to maintain for developers, so we can spend more time coding :)
> Prevents developers hair loss and temporary bouts of insanity. :)
>> After running
>> make -f Makefile.svn
>> Scribus compiles but can't find its plugins on execution.
>> Given this degree of uncertainty I will stick with as the
>> stable version and wait for the next major version. I have wasted too
>> much time on already.  It is only a minor release.
> <snipped>
> Excepting this issue, there are important fixes in
> Peter

Yes, and that's why I'd like to have it running here :-)

But can I use cmake on the same sources I downloaded now? And what 
exactly do I type to just have the same effect like
make install

If you just could give me a start, I'd like to give it a try...


More information about the scribus mailing list