CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Karl Hegbloom
I won't have time to try and fix these; I'm way behind on my Mathematics
homework and should really be working on that instead...

Hope this helps.  Do yous have an AMD64 to test compile on?

--
Karl Hegbloom <[hidden email]>

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

error.txt.gz (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Josh Sled
On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:36 -0800, Karl Hegbloom wrote:
> I won't have time to try and fix these; I'm way behind on my Mathematics
> homework and should really be working on that instead...
>
> Hope this helps.  Do yous have an AMD64 to test compile on?

Only vicariously through souls like yourself... :)

...but the issue here isn't x86_64 specific: the GSF_CLASS_FULL macro
errors in the lib/goffice/ code are due to a macro signature difference
in <=libgsf-1.12.1 and >=libgsf-1.12.2.

Neil Williams had put in a check re: libgoffice / libgsf to work around
this on his Debian Unstable box.  What system-installed versions of
libgsf and libgoffice do you have?

...jsled
--
http://asynchronous.org/ - `a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a}@${b}`
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Karl Hegbloom
On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 09:00 -0500, Josh Sled wrote:

> On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:36 -0800, Karl Hegbloom wrote:
> > I won't have time to try and fix these; I'm way behind on my Mathematics
> > homework and should really be working on that instead...
> >
> > Hope this helps.  Do yous have an AMD64 to test compile on?
>
> Only vicariously through souls like yourself... :)
>
> ...but the issue here isn't x86_64 specific: the GSF_CLASS_FULL macro
> errors in the lib/goffice/ code are due to a macro signature difference
> in <=libgsf-1.12.1 and >=libgsf-1.12.2.
>
> Neil Williams had put in a check re: libgoffice / libgsf to work around
> this on his Debian Unstable box.  What system-installed versions of
> libgsf and libgoffice do you have?

libgsf-1-dev       1.12.3-3ubuntu3
libgsf-gnome-1-dev 1.12.3-3ubuntu3

libgoffice-1-dev was not installed at all.  I just installed version
0.0.4-1, also from Ubuntu.

I don't know how it was able to finish 'configure' and compile as much
as it did if it requires libgoffice.  Perhaps a 'configure.in' check for
that is not present?  It probably would fail to link without it.

--
Karl Hegbloom <[hidden email]>

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Neil Williams-2
On Monday 31 October 2005 5:45 pm, Karl Hegbloom wrote:

> > ...but the issue here isn't x86_64 specific: the GSF_CLASS_FULL macro
> > errors in the lib/goffice/ code are due to a macro signature difference
> > in <=libgsf-1.12.1 and >=libgsf-1.12.2.
> >
> > Neil Williams had put in a check re: libgoffice / libgsf to work around
> > this on his Debian Unstable box.  What system-installed versions of
> > libgsf and libgoffice do you have?
>
> libgsf-1-dev       1.12.3-3ubuntu3
> libgsf-gnome-1-dev 1.12.3-3ubuntu3
>
> libgoffice-1-dev was not installed at all.  I just installed version
> 0.0.4-1, also from Ubuntu.
With goffice 0.0.4 installed, G2 will omit the internal goffice code and
bypass the macro problem.

> I don't know how it was able to finish 'configure' and compile as much
> as it did if it requires libgoffice.  Perhaps a 'configure.in' check for
> that is not present?  It probably would fail to link without it.

I still need to update configure.in to prompt for goffice if libgsf-1 >=
1.12.2 but it's best to get the G2 branch merged into HEAD and the change to
SVN before I go tweaking configure.in again.

--

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/


_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Derek Atkins
In reply to this post by Karl Hegbloom
Quoting Karl Hegbloom <[hidden email]>:

> On Mon, 2005-10-31 at 09:00 -0500, Josh Sled wrote:
>> On Sun, 2005-10-30 at 23:36 -0800, Karl Hegbloom wrote:
>> > I won't have time to try and fix these; I'm way behind on my Mathematics
>> > homework and should really be working on that instead...
>> >
>> > Hope this helps.  Do yous have an AMD64 to test compile on?
>>
>> Only vicariously through souls like yourself... :)
>>
>> ...but the issue here isn't x86_64 specific: the GSF_CLASS_FULL macro
>> errors in the lib/goffice/ code are due to a macro signature difference
>> in <=libgsf-1.12.1 and >=libgsf-1.12.2.
>>
>> Neil Williams had put in a check re: libgoffice / libgsf to work around
>> this on his Debian Unstable box.  What system-installed versions of
>> libgsf and libgoffice do you have?
>
> libgsf-1-dev       1.12.3-3ubuntu3
> libgsf-gnome-1-dev 1.12.3-3ubuntu3
>
> libgoffice-1-dev was not installed at all.  I just installed version
> 0.0.4-1, also from Ubuntu.
>
> I don't know how it was able to finish 'configure' and compile as much
> as it did if it requires libgoffice.  Perhaps a 'configure.in' check for
> that is not present?  It probably would fail to link without it.

There's an internal version of libgoffice that Gnucash tries to build.
Unfortunately it only builds with "older" libgsf.  So you have a "too
new"
libgsf but no libgoffice, which is the one part of the matrix that is known to
fail.  You are correct, there should be a configure switch that fails during
configure if it finds a too-new libgsf but no libgoffice.

However, it is perfectly legal to build w/o libgoffice installed...

-derek

--
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       [hidden email]                        PGP key available

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Derek Atkins
In reply to this post by Neil Williams-2
Quoting Neil Williams <[hidden email]>:

> I still need to update configure.in to prompt for goffice if libgsf-1 >=
> 1.12.2 but it's best to get the G2 branch merged into HEAD and the change to
> SVN before I go tweaking configure.in again.

I see no reason this needs to wait.  It's not a large change to configure.

-derek
--
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       [hidden email]                        PGP key available

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64

Neil Williams-2
On Monday 31 October 2005 8:00 pm, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Quoting Neil Williams <[hidden email]>:
> > I still need to update configure.in to prompt for goffice if libgsf-1 >=
> > 1.12.2 but it's best to get the G2 branch merged into HEAD and the change
> > to SVN before I go tweaking configure.in again.
>
> I see no reason this needs to wait.  It's not a large change to configure.

No, but it is a change I am unfortunately unable to make in the time before G2
gets locked. My available time for gnucash doesn't come in regular or
predictable slots - I have to fit it around other things and the next 24hrs
are not available. Sorry.

If someone else wants to do it, that's fine by me. Otherwise, I'll work on it
on Thursday and commit just as soon as I can.

--

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/


_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

attachment0 (196 bytes) Download Attachment