Rather than sweat why MinGW's gettext-0.17 has a dependency on libgcc_s_dw2-1.dll or rebuild gettext, it was much easier to punt and install gcc 4.4.0.
Thankfully, with Ubuntu 9.10 compatibility* issues seem to have lessened, at least for us. We were on 9.SomethingPrior and had lots of problems with some of the stuff the hubby uses. He got a lot of practice conjugating "fuck" in New And Exciting Ways, based on what I heard coming out of his office across the hall. :-////
*I tried to type "complatibility", which I think ought to mean the same thing, just with additional negative connotations.
Last year the Enigmail bunch did some l10n on a signing robot for OpenPGP n00bs. This is the required list from INSTALL:
* Requires:
GPC 2.1
librx
GnuPG 1.0.6
GPGME 0.3.4
MySQL 3.23.25
any standard MTA (syntax below given for exim)
cron
I got the *head-desk* "enjoyable" job of making sure it built.
I've been wanting to get some additional languages added to the existing -en and -de, but to test them, I also need to update the gpgme support since the API changed in 0.4.x. That also means a working Gnu Pascal (dormant since Sept 2007 against GCC 4.1.2) compiler since I don't want to do the additional port to Free Pascal...Yet.
pfft for translating a unit of text strings into another language? I'd hardly want to recode the entire thing for a maintenance activity such as that. If I was going to do it, I'd pick a different, newer, more widely used language, say... Python? Wirth's languages are great for teaching, but I've never been enamored of them for production use.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
*I tried to type "complatibility", which I think ought to mean the same thing, just with additional negative connotations.
Compatibility?
I've been wanting to get some additional languages added to the existing -en and -de, but to test them, I also need to update the gpgme support since the API changed in 0.4.x. That also means a working Gnu Pascal (dormant since Sept 2007 against GCC 4.1.2) compiler since I don't want to do the additional port to Free Pascal...Yet.
Re: Compatibility?
Re: Compatibility?
Re: Compatibility?
Re: Compatibility?
Re: Compatibility?
Ada is nowhere near as awful as its detractors like to claim. It's certainly no worse than C, and has some really lovely bits on top of it, to boot.
Agreed regarding the rest of Wirth's ouerve.
Re: Compatibility?
Re: Compatibility?
no subject