I have a file, octave-1.1.1.bin.tar.gz, too, which is the binary distribution
of octave version 2.0.9. (don't know why the file is named '1.1.1'!)
Now, I have the following problems:
1. I won't be able to compile 2.0.14 source distribution for want of disk
space. (Anyway, I will be happy if earlier versions will do.)
2. I don't know whether 'octave-2.0.11-i386-next-nextstep3.tar.gz' suits for my
system (RedHat Linux 5.2). What is meant by next step in the file name
I installed this distribution (and also octave-2.0.9), however, octave does not
start up at all. In both cases, the error given is
'Cannot run binary file ./octave'.
However, the executable file octave-bug seems to run.
3. I have heard of an X window manager by name 'NextStep'. Can this binary
distribution used in RHL 5.2?
4. I installed Octave 2.0.13 from the binary distribution. But, when I give the
command 'octave', it quits after "Segmentation fault (core dumped)".
The following is taken from the file README.Linux:
... it crashes with a segmentation fault
right away, you probably have incompatible versions of
libc and libg++ installed, or you have a version of the
dynamic loader, ld.so, that is incompatible with your
versions of the libraries, or both.
I have checked the README.*, INSTALL.*
files available with the distribution and found that RHL 5.2 contains the
required versions of the supporting packages above.
Assuming that I am content without dynamic loader, are
ld.so, libc, libg++, libstdc++, gcc/ecgs, etc. required at all?
If yes, which versions of these packages are to be installed?
While all these packages are essential for compiling from source, do we need
to have all of them to just install octave from a binary distribution?
I am sorry for a long and probably ambiguous mail after three days of fight
and frustration due to unsuccessful installation. Even octave 2.0.9 which used
to run earlier on RHL 5.0 does not run now on 5.2! :-)))
Thanks in advance.
PS: I found a mail related to 'Seg fault with 2.0.13' in the mail archive.
But, could not get much information. I tried in vain to get the rpm for 2.0.13
as I could not connect to contrib.redhat.com as mentioned in the particular
Also, the net is too slow for online reading of the archive during the past
few days of my attempt.
Himanshu Gohel wrote:
> Hi Vivek,
> -=>1. I won't be able to compile 2.0.14 source distribution for want of
> -=>disk space.
> Maybe if you just extract the source and compile each directory
> one by one and remove the .o files afterwards? Would that help
> to put the whole package together?
I dont think that this will work, unless the final `make' is issued in
the `src' directory, otherwise the make rules will rebuild everything.
And it can be a pain to cd to all libcruft sub-directories.
I usualy compile without debuging and only with shared libs. This has
big size impact.