Re: Previously Compiled Packages

That was my immediate reaction, but it leaves one wondering if the
original poster is "worried about nothing", ie the original would
have been compiled nice and straightforwardly, or if he knows something
to believe there was something odd about the compile.

I'm likely worried about nothing, sure. I'm just trying to find out anything and everything I can about the current state of things before I start building the new server. It's better to answer questions now than after it goes into production :)

It looks like the config files in the source directory are still in tact, but I worry that they show a different machine name than the current one. Maybe the machine was renamed since then...

In any event, thanks for the help!


Regards,
David
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Invoking Python from Python
    ... original poster. ... and exec() with a concise example from Fredrik Lundh. ... With dynamically generated code I prefer the separate compile() ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: chicken and egg
    ... >>Odd. ... I have a whole directory full of smallish C programs, ... Compile. ... > int main{ ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: More on triangle numbers and primes!
    ... there could be an easy way to check for primality for ... > First all odd number checks will have the first two ... I have the proofs yet to study and also the graphical characteristics ... (The original poster says calls the second case the second ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Miscellaneous questions about modules and types
    ... >> does not compile unless I do so. ... > Odd. ... DATA statement object. ... line 656: This derived type name has not been ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Miscellaneous questions about modules and types
    ... >> does not compile unless I do so. ... > Odd. ... DATA statement object. ... line 656: This derived type name has not been ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)