installation on ubuntu 10.04 (xext-dev not found)


I tried to install openFrameworks on Ubuntu 10.04 (64-bit studio) and followed the readme-file. Unfortunately, running the codeblocks installation script leads into a loop, there are the following messages

Reading package lists… Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information… Done
E: Couldn’t find package xext-dev

I tried to install xext-dev manually but could not find it. There is x11proto-xext-dev available and I installed it but that did not resolve the problem. Any ideas what to do ?

Thanks a lot,
best, Florian

mmh, perhaps that package doesn’t exist in the studio edition, which is weird cause it should be the same repos as ubuntu but you can try editing the script and removing that package from the apt-get command


The error has disappeared now. A friend suggested that I should also try to run the dependencies script to see whether this works. It did and after that, the codeblocks script was also working (there was one warning related to a GPG error / missing public key but nothing serious …). Codeblocks version 10.05 is running now.



it also doesn’t exist in the stock ubuntu 11.04 repos, so that’s not a studio thing.

thanks, will remove it for 007

in a similar vein, is it still necessary to install the codeblocks nightly, and a wxwidgets custom version? wasn’t this originally introduced because there was no cb 10.05 in the official repos? 10.05 is now in the default repos for 10.04+, so wouldn’t it be better to keep the default version? or am i reading the install script wrong?

yes, it seems like it was installing nightly, but it’s not, except for old versions of ubuntu. install_codeblocks queries an online script passing it the ubuntu version, the online thing returns the version of wxwidgets repo + nightly cb which from maverick is empty so it will download the default one from the official ubuntu repos.

i did this sometime ago cause versions keep breaking with updates so this way i could switch the version for everyone by changing the versions in the online script.


aah, thanks for the clarification…nifty! the bash-fu was too strong for me :stuck_out_tongue: