Another GConf question

DJ Lucas dj at
Sat Dec 4 10:39:22 PST 2010

On 12/04/2010 10:23 AM, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Hi all,
> I meant to add this question to the previous email and forgot so here
> goes. If ${GNOME_PREFIX} is not /usr, the following file is created:
> /opt/gnome/share/sgml/gconf/gconf-1.0.dtd
> Though there is no catalog file associated with this dtd, does the system
> /etc/sgml/catalog need to be updated to reflect this file, or will GConf
> know to look in the alternate prefix when it needs this dtd file?

Randy, I don't know about this particular one as I don't rebuild
documentation, however, there are some issues if not installing in /usr.
The three you mentioned in your other message are correct (symnlink for
#3). I have some of it documented, but it goes back to gnome-2.28 in
February. Some is still valid so you can take a look if you like, but
this was an attempt to simplify the instructions (similar to the

I could also post updated build scripts for 2.30 if you like, but these
also use the GNOME_CONFIG method rather than the pkg-config output.

Stuff is slowly getting fixed upstream, but there are three issues that
stick out in particular. GVFS GIO module installation location. This has
been fixed and broken many times upstream due to a broken distcheck
target, but I have a patch in the patches repo. That might be covered
int the book already. GDM Xorg paths not found, which has been partially
covered by the maintainer (we have a workaround upstream now, it'll
work, but it's not completely automated as it should be IMO, and it
still exists in the version in the book, for which I think Wayne added a
patch. Finally, there are also issues with the icon installations in
several packages.

Additionally, when running autotools on these, you'll have to account
for the alternate locations for m4 files and what not. These have been
covered on list many times, but give me a couple hours and I'll find and
post links to the upstream bug reports for you (I have them buried in my
archives somewhere, or might even be in patch headers).

-- DJ Lucas

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list