Debian build Problems with liblo

Installation & Configuration Linux
#1

Hi,

i just tried to compile 2.5 under an actual Debian SID. 3.0 compiles without problems.

The following error occurs:

Checking for lo_server_new() in C library lo… no
liblo does not appear to be installed.

I have the package installed, and 3.0 compiles as usual.
The SConstruct file seems to be the same.
I tried both compilations in clean directories.

Is that behaviour known? Is there an workaround or a fix?

Thanks for your help,
Beowulf

#2

You either have the wrong version, or you installed it incorrectly, or you didn’t install the development package (liblo-dev, liblo-devel) as mentioned in the build instructions.

#3

I installed the official Debian dev package:

~$ dpkg -l|grep liblo
ii  liblo0-dev   0.23-2.2   Lightweight OSC library -- development files
ii  liblo0ldbl   0.23-2.2   Lightweight OSC library

The files are under /usr/lib, and that should be the right place:

~$ locate liblo
/usr/lib/liblo.a
/usr/lib/liblockfile.so.1
/usr/lib/liblockfile.so.1.0
/usr/lib/liblo.la
/usr/lib/liblo.so
/usr/lib/liblo.so.0
/usr/lib/liblo.so.0.6.0

That stuff looks ok for me. Which version is needed? And why does 3.0 work?

#4

That stuff is really kidding me.

The problem completely disappeared after activating Freesound and LV2 Support. I have no idea, why…

#5

Thanks for all those wonderful tips. I got some problems with 3.0 installed but now it seems to have gone. Looking forward for more such useful tips.

Car lease

#6

Yes, I too really had that problem previously with the 3.0 package installed and received the same errors as you have mentioned. Thanks for the tip. It really worked as I activated Freesound and LV2 support.

Peter Oliver

#7

Well, I am not very familiar in Debian environment, but I am learning from other person who replies on your questions. soap nuts

#8

debian is an operating system for linux expers or geek. I think if you are a home user you should avoid debian better using UBUNTU or LINUX MINT. heartland energy colorado

#9

Thanks for the suggestion and now I don’t seem to face any problem with 3.0. Yes I also agree that 2.5 complies without problem. But 3.0 is much better than 2.5 I bet.

teeth whitening

#10

Thanks for the valuable suggestion. The 3.0 is a bit tricky to understand and sometimes gets into unnecessary compilation error but a very great successor to the prior 2.5 version.

rome location

#11

Thanks for the suggestion and now I don’t seem to face any problem with 3.0. I like the layout of 3 as it is very good.Cheers medical scrubs .

#12

Yes, Me too faced the same problem when compiling with 2.5. I am equally interested in the solution this. 3.0 works fine but I am more accustomed with 2.5.
Raleigh Neighborhoods