Jamie Ostrowski wrote:

> 
>    I am trying to install a program. When I run ./configure, I get this
> message, then the configure process stops:
> 
>  checking for gdk-pixbuf >= 0.4... configure: error: not
> found.\nEucalyptus requires gdk-pixbuf version 0.4 or higher.
> 
>   I went out on the net and I downloaded the file:
> 
>   gdk-pixbuf-0.6.0-1.i586.rpm
> 
>   and I installed it in this fashion:
> 
>   [root at redeye jamie]# rpm -Uvh gdk-pixbuf-0.6.0-1.i586.rpm
> 
> 
>   Rpm seemed to install it fine. Gave me the nice graph as it did it's
> work. Hmmm...I thought, that was easy enough. Now I will simply run
> ./configure again and I am certain it will work as I intend it to...
> 
>   I get the SAME error!
> 
>   {In my mind, I am assuming that by running the rpm for that package,
> and since I found no further instructions associated with it, that it
> would install whatever libraries I need. Evidently I am mistaken.}
> 
> 
>    Can anyone shed some light on my weary mind?
> 
>    BTW: I am trying to install eucalyptus, a gui based gnome mail client
> that handles MIME types. Thnks.
> 
>    - Jamie
> 
>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tclug-list mailing list
> tclug-list at lists.real-time.com
> https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list

I would try any or all of the following:

-look for a gdk-pixbuf-devel package >= 0.4 and install that as well
-run ldconfig to make sure ld knows about the new lib versions
-check the options to configure and see if you can tell it the path to 
gdk-pixbuf; it might be looking in /var/foo/silly_path/myGDKfiles/warez, 
you never know
-if configure isn't configured to configure that option, crack open the 
Makefile and check it out there
-curse loudly, creatively, foully and long
-have a beer and try again.

-- 
<---------------------------------------------------------------------->
Chris H. Bidler                                   cbidler at talkware.net
Associate Engineer, Applications Group
Universal Talkware Corp.

"In any event, is a O^(log N) search that returns the wrong answer
really better than an O^N search that returns the right answer?"
<---------------------------------------------------------------------->