User forums > Help

Best way to update C::B on Linux from SVN

(1/3) > >>

Keeper:
I am using the nightly builds from the SVN.  I'm wondering what's the best way to update my installation?  I actually delete my build directory, reconfigure ( with a bash script ), and then recompile it.  Would it be best if I
--- Code: ---make clean
 make distclean
 make clean-bin
 make clean-zipfiles
--- End code ---
first?  Or is it ok if I just install over the old one?

I've thought about changing the prefix to be in it's own dir so I can just wipe it out and start over, but thought I'd ask here first.

Thanks,
Keeper

Jenna:

--- Quote from: Keeper on January 08, 2010, 06:03:42 pm ---I've thought about changing the prefix to be in it's own dir so I can just wipe it out and start over, but thought I'd ask here first.

--- End quote ---
That's a good thing in any case.

You should delete the precompiled header-files (src/include/*.gch) manually and run ./bootstrap and ./configure [...].

--- Code: ---make clean
--- End code ---
[/b] is normally not needed.

To run the bootstrap-script is not necessary in the most cases, but if one of the automake-files has changed and you don't do that, you will run in an error.

Keeper:
Ok, well I did install it to /usr/local

But I am going to change it to /usr/local/cb

that way I can delete it and rebuild at any point and know I've got a clean slate.

stefanos_:
@jens: Hey mate, since you are using GNU / Linux, you might help me a bit.

I use GNU / Linux Fedora 12 (and soon 13), and I would like to do everything I do under Windows at work.

I update Code::Blocks using svn (either through RapidSVN or command line itself), open it with Code::Blocks stable edition; if everything works OK, I run update.bat and everything synchronizes smoothly.

Now about GNU / Linux. I have opened update script (for GNU / Linux systems) to see the differences from Windows batch file and saw that it does not do exactly the same things as update.bat.

I find it irritating all the time to run commands like


* ./boostrap
* ./configure --with-contrib-plugins=all
* make
* su -c 'make install'
whereas I have available CodeBlocks-unix.cbp and ContribPlugins-unix.workspace, and I compile everything just fine. What I did this time was to run the whole process as I usually do, and run afterwards ./update script. I can see that it has generated a run.sh script and by running it, it gives me the chance to test my application. What about an update command so I may avoid the previous painful procedure?

Shouldn't update script do exactly the same thing like update.bat?

Please advice.

Folco:

--- Quote ---I use GNU / Linux Fedora 12 (and soon 13)
--- End quote ---

--- Code: ---    * ./boostrap
    * ./configure --with-contrib-plugins=all
    * make
    * su -c 'make install'
--- End code ---
Be courageous, with Fedora 13, it will be harder :

--- Code: ---    * ./boostrap
    * ./configure --with-contrib-plugins=[all plugins separated with commas, omitting codesnippets, because else you have to patch it]
    * make
    * su -c 'make install'
--- End code ---

By the way, why dont you write a script in your home to handle that ? put all that in build_and_install_codeblocks_for_me.sh which could look like that :

--- Code: ---svn checkout http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/codeblocks/trunk
cd trunk
./boostrap
./configure --with-contrib-plugins=[all plugins separated with commas, omitting codesnippets, because else you have to patch codesnippets]
make
su -c 'make install'
--- End code ---
It should'nt be a more convenient way ?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page