Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
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/ pgpkyMpsVKlwO.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
Quoting Karl Hegbloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
Quoting Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP key available ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
On Monday 31 October 2005 8:00 pm, Derek Atkins wrote: Quoting Neil Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 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/ pgpLvqCcUWfmn.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
CVS, Oct 30, Build errors on x86_64
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] error.txt.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
