[chuck-users] Compiling chuck on UbuntuStudioGutsy32

Eric Hedekar afterthebeep at gmail.com
Fri Dec 14 17:25:09 EST 2007

> This is a common problem when compiling stuff from source: missing
> packages. It's easy to install the needed packages your self, if you
> know what you need!
> First install apt-file (and run "sudo apt-file update"). Now look at the
> errors you got. The first problem marked "error" says that it can't find
> a file called "jack.h", however apt-file can find it for you: "apt-file
> search jack.h", which I think (I'm not on ubuntu) will report
> libjack-dev. So you do "sudo apt-get install libjack-dev". Run make
> again, and repeat the above for other missing packages.

Hmm, I've been using linux for the last four years and this is the first
time anyone has ever told me about apt-file.  Nearly every package I've ever
needed to install from source has listed the dependencies.

> > It would really be nice if some proper Linux documentation could be
> > written into the upcoming versions of the install tutorial.  I'd be
> > happy to help write it once I understand it.
> I can understand that you'd rather have a nice list of packages to
> install, but I personally don't think this is such a good idea, mainly
> because it's likely to become unmaintained quite quickly. Remember that
> the problems you encountered are not a sign of anything not working,
> quite the opposite. It's a perfectly normal behaviour and the error
> messages even give you an exact description of the problem.
> After you've done this a few times with a few programs, I suspect you'll
> agree with me that it's quite straight forward, and that a list of
> packages to install beforehand is not needed...
> NB: Glad to hear that you got it working!

I can see where you're coming from with the package list possibly not being
maintained, but it'd still be better than nothing at all.  I knew all along
that the error messages are there for a reason, I just didn't understand
what they were saying.  This does not mean that things are working fine.  If
audio enthusiasts such as myself need to know of obscure (maybe apt-file is
not obscure, and I've been living under a rock) linux admin commands to get
ChucK installed then something is not working - the install interface.
Nowadays in gutsy apt-get is becoming a backend command and almost
everything is being migrated to Synaptic or at least .deb packages that
allow for point-click install.  I am aware that ChucK is a developing
program and that it is also designed for programmers, but it's also meant
for composers and musicians who don't know everything there is to know about
reading error messages.  I'd love to see a .deb packaged in time to be in
the repos for Hardy's LTS release in April but if that's not doable, then
can we at least get a page of "How to use apt-file to find missing
dependencies" in the linux install directions instead of the current "No
help here" phrase that discourages newbies from experimenting.

Just my 2cents.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cs.princeton.edu/pipermail/chuck-users/attachments/20071214/9758c4ab/attachment.htm 

More information about the chuck-users mailing list