Le 06/05/2012 04:58, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
(New sub-thread) .info has disappeared
If a project has its type set to Component now, when it is compiled
(or Make Executable) there is no .info file created in the project
directory any more.
Is this by design?
(Because the autotools install
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 00:40 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 06/05/2012 04:58, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
(New sub-thread) .info has disappeared
If a project has its type set to Component now, when it is compiled
(or Make Executable) there is no .info file created in the project
directory
Le 07/05/2012 01:18, GMail a écrit :
Do you have a .list file too ? Can you send me the project ?
Sorry Benoît,
In the clear light of day, I see that this was my error. In a frenzied
fit of code cleaning, I deleted the only class that was exported from
the component :-(
Bruce
The
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 01:20 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
The autotools packager should work anyway, even if a component with no
exported class seems to not be really useful. :-)
OK, (but I wouldn't really consider this worth fixing)
Source archive for a no exports component attached.
On Sat, 05 May 2012, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 05/05/2012 03:42, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 02:45 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 04/05/2012 23:34, Benoît Minisini a écrit :
I don't like any of those solution at the moment.
And if I define a compilation constant that
Le 05/05/2012 08:51, tobi a écrit :
Concerning the preprocessor... What about utilising the cpp just as a command
that runs over each
class and module file before seen by the compiler code? It's already powerful
enough or is that
too much for gambas? (It would break existing code due to
On Sat, 05 May 2012, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 05/05/2012 08:51, tobi a écrit :
Concerning the preprocessor... What about utilising the cpp just as a
command that runs over each
class and module file before seen by the compiler code? It's already
powerful enough or is that
too much
On Sat, 05 May 2012, tobi wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 05/05/2012 08:51, tobi a écrit :
Concerning the preprocessor... What about utilising the cpp just as a
command that runs over each
class and module file before seen by the compiler code? It's already
Le 05/05/2012 15:30, tobi a écrit :
OK.
But just for interest, what do you mean by impossible to analyze? Excuse
me, but I haven't read
anything from the compiler yet. (When you say analyze, I think of line
numbers and stuff
(optimisation can be done later, too, right?), but line numbers
On Sat, 05 May 2012, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 05/05/2012 15:30, tobi a écrit :
OK.
But just for interest, what do you mean by impossible to analyze? Excuse
me, but I haven't read
anything from the compiler yet. (When you say analyze, I think of line
numbers and stuff
(New sub-thread) .info has disappeared
If a project has its type set to Component now, when it is compiled
(or Make Executable) there is no .info file created in the project
directory any more.
Is this by design?
(Because the autotools install target is still looking for it and
fails. I can
Subtopic autotools
autotools now works like a dream. We have been distributing stuff via
autotools for several days now and have only come across the following
problem.
make uninstall (as root) appears to work but in fact doesn't. Given
that we have installed sysinfos-0.0.2.tar.gz via the
Le 02/05/2012 06:54, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
Hi folks!
(I'm getting pretty excited about the packager now.)
Benoît,
Please consider this little change for the autotools packager code in
the IDE.
We use a lot of common images in our projects. Corporate identity etc
etc blah blah...
Le 04/05/2012 15:25, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
Subtopic autotools
autotools now works like a dream. We have been distributing stuff via
autotools for several days now and have only come across the following
problem.
make uninstall (as root) appears to work but in fact doesn't. Given
that we
Le 01/05/2012 14:15, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
Oh I forgot!
A new problem. Spaces in the vendor name cause fails in the rpm
builder.
This is not a high priority issue, but it would be nice if spaces in the
Vendor name field in the wizard were converted to underscores before
it was used in the
Le 01/05/2012 13:27, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 12:22 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
A lot of answers to a lot of stuff, so I'm going to break it up into
several posts.
Le 29/04/2012 06:45, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
SUGGESTION: Libraries should not need to have a startup
Le 04/05/2012 23:34, Benoît Minisini a écrit :
I don't like any of those solution at the moment.
And if I define a compilation constant that will tell the compiler if we
are making an executable or not? That way, you will just have to add a
#If Executable (or something like that) to compile
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 02:45 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 04/05/2012 23:34, Benoît Minisini a écrit :
I don't like any of those solution at the moment.
And if I define a compilation constant that will tell the compiler if we
are making an executable or not? That way, you will just
Le 05/05/2012 03:42, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 02:45 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 04/05/2012 23:34, Benoît Minisini a écrit :
I don't like any of those solution at the moment.
And if I define a compilation constant that will tell the compiler if we
are making an
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 23:19 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 04/05/2012 15:25, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
Subtopic autotools
autotools now works like a dream. We have been distributing stuff via
autotools for several days now and have only come across the following
problem.
make
Thanks,
Works fine now.
Bruce
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 23:17 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 02/05/2012 06:54, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
Hi folks!
(I'm getting pretty excited about the packager now.)
Benoît,
Please consider this little change for the autotools packager code in
the
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 03:59 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 05/05/2012 03:42, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 02:45 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Le 04/05/2012 23:34, Benoît Minisini a écrit :
...
And if I define a compilation constant that will tell the compiler if we
Le 29/04/2012 06:45, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
SUGGESTION: Libraries should not need to have a startup class. At
the moment I must include a dummy module to prevent any
test-harness code leaking into the user environment (which could
cause damage if the library were to be run as a normal gambas
Am Dienstag, den 01.05.2012, 12:22 +0200 schrieb Benoît Minisini:
Le 29/04/2012 06:45, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
SUGGESTION: Libraries should not need to have a startup class. At
the moment I must include a dummy module to prevent any
test-harness code leaking into the user environment
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 12:22 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
A lot of answers to a lot of stuff, so I'm going to break it up into several
posts.
Le 29/04/2012 06:45, Bruce Bruen a écrit :
SUGGESTION: Libraries should not need to have a startup class. At
the moment I must include a dummy
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 12:22 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
In reply to my:
Not sure about this as far as the autotools packager is concerned.
The icon.png is certainly in the gzip file (but is this because
autotools is a source level package?)
autotools is not reliable at the moment
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 12:22 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
in reply to my
I tried using the Mandriva and Fedora RPM based packaging, which
allowed me to create proper looking distribution packages, but ...
When I tested the installation locally I run into the following
problem. There is a
Oh I forgot!
A new problem. Spaces in the vendor name cause fails in the rpm
builder.
This is not a high priority issue, but it would be nice if spaces in the
Vendor name field in the wizard were converted to underscores before
it was used in the rpm build.
But then again, it's probably only
Hi folks!
(I'm getting pretty excited about the packager now.)
Benoît,
Please consider this little change for the autotools packager code in
the IDE.
We use a lot of common images in our projects. Corporate identity etc
etc blah blah... Rather than have copies of all these in the projects
Hi,
I'm continue in fixing problems in library and component packaging. Here
are the last news...
Since revision #4687, there is now a project type option in the project
properties dialog, which allows to make the difference between a normal
project, a library and a component.
What are the
On za, 2012-04-28 at 15:26 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Hi,
I'm continue in fixing problems in library and component packaging. Here
are the last news...
Since revision #4687, there is now a project type option in the project
properties dialog, which allows to make the difference
Le 29/04/2012 00:14, Willy Raets a écrit :
On za, 2012-04-28 at 15:26 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Please try it and give your remarks!
Tested with revision 4688
Quite an improvement.
Library packages just fine.
Upon installation Ubuntu recognizes it as a library (see screenshot
Hi Benoit,
A few comments inline...
regards
Bruce
On Sat, 2012-04-28 at 15:26 +0200, Benoît Minisini wrote:
Hi,
I'm continue in fixing problems in library and component packaging. Here
are the last news...
Since revision #4687, there is now a project type option in the project
33 matches
Mail list logo
