[conspire] Breezy Badger/configure something
rick at linuxmafia.com
Tue Jan 3 17:07:20 PST 2006
Quoting John Andrews (jla1200 at netzero.net):
[Ubuntu/Kubuntu 5.10, compiling units 1.74 as an exercise:]
> It seems okay to this point.
> Why doesn't this ./configure --prefix$HOME/unit174 command work right [?]
Seems to need a "=", there. Observe:
$ cd /tmp
$ mkdir foo
$ tar xzf units-1.74.tar.gz
$ cd units-1.74
$ ./configure --prefix=/tmp/foo
creating cache ./config.cache
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler (gcc ) works... yes
checking whether the C compiler (gcc ) is a cross-compiler... no
checking whether we are using GNU C... yes
checking whether gcc accepts -g... yes
checking for gcc option to accept ANSI C...
checking how to run the C preprocessor... gcc -E
checking for function prototypes... yes
checking for working const... yes
checking for a BSD compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking for tparm in -lncurses... yes
checking for readline in -lreadline... yes
checking for readline/readline.h... yes
checking for string.h... yes
checking for stdlib.h... yes
checking for strchr... yes
checking for strspn... yes
checking for strtok... yes
updating cache ./config.cache
By the way, if you follow the diagnostic's advice about using the "--help"
$ ./configure --help | more
Usage: configure [options] [host]
Options: [defaults in brackets after descriptions]
--cache-file=FILE cache test results in FILE
--help print this message
--no-create do not create output files
--quiet, --silent do not print `checking...' messages
--version print the version of autoconf that created configure
Directory and file names:
--prefix=PREFIX install architecture-independent files in PREFIX
> THIS PART i THOUGHT SHOULD WORK CORRECTLY. Why isn't gcc on my $PATH. i know
> it's installed.
> jla at vstrom:~/download$ cd units-1.74
> jla at vstrom:~/download/units-1.74$ ./configure
> loading cache ./config.cache
> checking for gcc... no
> checking for cc... no
> configure: error: no acceptable cc found in $PATH
> jla at vstrom:~/download/units-1.74$
This is one of those areas where you'll have to help us. On the system
in front of me:
$ which cc
I'm guessing that you get this?
$ which cc
cc: Command not found.
> Why isn't gcc on my $PATH?
Well, first of all, you didn't tell us what $PATH _is_ on your system.
Again, on the machine in front of me:
$ echo $PATH
The "which" command returns "/usr/bin/cc" specifically because (1) "/usr/bin"
is among the directories included in $PATH, and (2) there's a file in
that directory by that name that has its executable bit set.
$ ls -l /usr/bin/cc
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3 Jul 16 01:53 /usr/bin/cc -> gcc
As you can see, it happens to be a symbolic link. You could create a
"cc" symlink, I suppose -- though I'd put it in /usr/local/bin, rather
A little googling on "Ubuntu cc symlink" reveals the sensible
alternative notion that you can just set an environment variable called "CC",
defining it to be wherever the gcc binary lives. You decide. If you
prefer to declare the CC environment variable, you can just put this
somewhere appropriate in your ~/.bashrc script:
(This assumes that there's a /usr/bin/gcc executable present. Adjust to
suit whatever you have.)
If that seems too complex or you're queasy about what "somewhere
appropriate" means in this context, just do the symlink thing:
$ su -
# ln -s /usr/bin/gcc /usr/local/bin/cc
That's probably simpler, really.
> Why isn't gcc on my $PATH?
Wrong question. You _didn't go looking for_ "gcc", and nor did the
configure script: The configure script looked for "cc".
For whatever reason, Ubuntu chose to neither define that environment
variable nor establish a (hard or soft) "cc" executable. Maybe they
didn't expect their target audience to compile much software from
tarballs (which seems likely enough) -- or expected that most software
compiled on a Linux box would search for "gcc" instead of just failing
to find "cc" and falling over. Or both.
Anyhow, that should help.
More information about the conspire