On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 11:15:29AM -0800, Per Bjornsson wrote:
That should work as well of course, and shouldn't rely on much at all. Depending on the distro where it was compiled, the compat-libstdc++ RPM for Fedora might be needed, I don't think that libstdc++ is linked in statically in that RPM? In any case, that's fairly easy and Bob likely already has it installed since RPM was apparently happy to install the FC2 gtkmm et al RPMs which should also need compat-libstdc++ on FC3.
The static RPMs are built on ... Debian unstable. ;) And no, libstdc++ isn't static in it. I wonder if this is going to cause problems for people with gcc3.4-compiled libstdc++? Debian unstable is using gcc 3.3.5.
By the way, I sort of think that it would be nice to have the upstream Inkscape RPMs have a release tag that starts with "0." (so the 0.41 static RPM would have been named inkscape-0.41-0.static.i386.rpm etc) since that would make official distribution packages override them (I think all distros start their release numbering at 1, or more if they have gone through test versions that didn't work out - in any case more than 0). In the case where the distro does provide packages I think they
Oh! Yes, very good idea. I've updated the base spec file.