[maemo-developers] devkit doctools in chinook?

[From: Julius Luukko]

Juha Kallioinen wrote:
> ext Julius Luukko wrote:
>> Juha Kallioinen wrote:
>>> ext Julius Luukko wrote:
> ...
>>> Heh now I feel stupid responding so many times to your post. I tried 
>>> compiling maemopad from the sources and it compiled fine without any 
>>> modifications and without the doctools devkit.
>>
>> Interesting. But do you have intltool installed if you don't have 
>> doctools?
> 
> I did install intltool from the Chinook repository and I am not using 
> the doctools devkit. My Scratchbox target configuration looks like this:
> 
> [sbox-CHINOOK_X86: ~/tmp/pad] > sb-conf sh
> Compiler: cs2005q3.2-glibc2.5-i386
> Devkits: perl debian-etch maemo3-tools
> CPU-transparency: none
> 

I now have

[sbox-CHINOOK_ARMEL: ~] > sb-conf sh
Compiler: cs2005q3.2-glibc2.5-arm
Devkits: perl debian-etch maemo3-tools cputransp doctools
CPU-transparency: /scratchbox/devkits/cputransp/bin/qemu-arm-0.8.2-sb2
[sbox-CHINOOK_ARMEL: ~] > which intltoolize
/scratchbox/devkits/doctools/bin/intltoolize
[sbox-CHINOOK_ARMEL: ~] > intltoolize --version
intltoolize (GNU intltool) 0.33

> It seems that also the cputransp devkit for Chinook is newer than what 
> you have there. Also check the scratchbox-core and scratchbox-libs 
> versions you have.
> 

I only updated those packages that maemo-sdk-install_4.0.sh complained 
about. I must have just downloaded the wrong file for devkit-cputransp 
from http://scratchbox.org/download/files/sbox-releases/apophis/tarball
I updated it now, but it didn't make a difference at least in this 
intltool matter. I am not sure about versions of scratchbox-core and 
scratchbox-libs, but those should have been checked by 
maemo-sdk-install_4.0.sh.

It seems, however, that I can cope with the intltool from the doctools 
devkit. Thanks for your time, Juha.

-- 
Julius