Created attachment 9213 [details] Log generated from running "configure" "configure" completes and states that it has generated "Makefile", but it is only 17 bytes. The contents of the file is "base/Makefile.in". I have attached the "config.log" and the console output from "configure". I need to compile and install the library and associated headers to build Cairo. Cairo does not require it, but I want all of Cairo's functionality.
Created attachment 9214 [details] Console output from running "configure"
The Makefile.in file is actually a symlink. Try deleting that and copying base/Makefile.in into the top level directory instead of the link.
Doh! I feel dumb for missing that one. I should have realized that. Unfortunately, "make" reports that there is a syntax error in the generated Makefile. The error is "Makefile:178: *** missing separator. Stop.". I have attached the generated Makefile.
Created attachment 9215 [details] Makefile from "base/Makefile.in"
"Makefile.in" is not the makefile, it is the makefile template - "Makefile" is the makefile.
Yes. I know this. There is no "Makefile" in the "base" directory. There is only "base/Makefile.in". In my original post, I thought you wanted to include "base/Makefile.in" in the "Makefile" generated in the root folder, so maybe there was a syntax error. You then mentioned it was a symlink.
The Unix configure script uses Makefile.in as a template from which to generate Makefile. The Unix configure script expects to find Makefile.in in the same directory as the script itself, and on real Unix systems, a symlink is used for this. If you delete the symlink, copy base/Makefile.in to the top level directory and then run the configure script, it should create a Makefile. I'm not overly hopeful that the build will work on msys, since the build is for Unix-type systems, and msys is likely insufficiently Unix-like for current Ghostscript releases.
>The Unix configure script expects to find Makefile.in in the >same directory as the script itself, and on real Unix systems, >a symlink is used for this. Yes. I know this too. Not all of us are dumb Windows users! I understand the concept of a symbolic link. Believe me, it is not that I have a love for Windows! My life started with VMS and Solaris in school many years ago. I just downloaded ghostscript-9.06 on my Fedora 14 x64 box, ran "configure;make;make install"(using updated libraries not those supplied), and it worked fine. I also noticed the link in the root folder. Obviously, this would not appear under Windows. >I'm not overly hopeful that the build will work on msys, >since the build is for Unix-type systems, and msys is >likely insufficiently Unix-like for current Ghostscript releases. I know the limitations of msys, but I detest Cygwin. If this files, I will build with Visual Studio, make an import library, and add it to mingw's lib folder. Which header file(s) should be copied to the include directory?
>I'm not overly hopeful that the build will work on msys, >since the build is for Unix-type systems, and msys >is likely insufficiently Unix-like for current Ghostscript releases. "I find your lack of faith disturbing." (sorry, could not resist) It compiled fine. The ghostscript executable works fine, however, because I do not have gtk+ 3.x installed, it will not render to the screen. I did a few tests with output to various file formats, and it worked fine. I could not build the shared libary due to the dependency on gtk+ 3.x. Anyway, I have downloaded a binary package of gtk+ 3.4, and I am going to attempt to get it to build ghostscript with screen output.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 693493 ***