Quoting: slaapliedjeSomeone want to fix / recompile the original XKobo?

Quoting: GroganSo yes (point taken?), open source software can be just as broken if nobody capable is willing to fix it :-)

In this particular case somebody actually cared and made Kobo Deluxe. Though yes, plenty of old projects around that are left to rot. I'm not sure how well Kobo Deluxe works these days.

Quoting: GroganP.P.S Nah, I got imake to generate a working Makefile, but the source is chock full of class definitions and stuff (e.g. string to char conversions and such) that just aren't valid in C++ anymore, the compiler just isn't going to do it and while you could override it with flags and attempt to proceed, it just can't work anyway. Someone could certainly fix this, but that someone isn't me. It's not just that it would be laborious, I can't do it. Again, wouldn't know until I looked at it though.

I guess there's a reason why distributions like Gentoo keep the old GCC versions around for a while

Quoting: AnzaI guess there's a reason why distributions like Gentoo keep the old GCC versions around for a while

I haven't done that since they broke the ABI with gcc 3.x. I used to have gcc 2.95 for kernel compiling and for stuff that has to interface with stuff built with the old gcc. This was more of a problem for c++ (For example, you couldn't compile a KDE component with gcc 3 if the rest of it was built with the distro's gcc 2.95).

Nothing like that has ever happened again with gcc, since that change, but newer versions are more persnickety in what they'll accept.

Quoting: Grogan

Quoting: slaapliedjeSomeone want to fix / recompile the original XKobo?

I thought to take a look at that but the original "unix" sources are only available as naked .C and .h files, with no project files or anything. Kind of like the bare minimum for providing sources.

So I'm not going to waste my time trying to poke at it because it's non-trivial to figure out the order the files need to be built in, just to get started. It may have been over my head anyway, but not always. I don't really know until I get poking, sometimes it's just a matter of taking a look at includes and finding the right way to define things, or it could have been as trivial as distros not providing a full SDL 1.x package (I have it).

P.S. Actually the above is not true in this instance. I found an Imakefile... gotta get macros and templates in order first to see about that though.

P.P.S Nah, I got imake to generate a working Makefile, but the source is chock full of class definitions and stuff (e.g. string to char conversions and such) that just aren't valid in C++ anymore, the compiler just isn't going to do it and while you could override it with flags and attempt to proceed, it just can't work anyway. Someone could certainly fix this, but that someone isn't me. It's not just that it would be laborious, I can't do it. Again, wouldn't know until I looked at it though.

So yes (point taken?), open source software can be just as broken if nobody capable is willing to fix it :-)

Ha, yeah, you ran down the same rabbit hole I did, and sounds like you got a little further than I did. As I started looking at the code / errors, but not knowing C or C++., I did not get past that.

I'm on your side on that though, I figured it shouldn't be terribly difficult with the source to get it working again...