User forums > Help

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

<< < (2/3) > >>

Jenna:

--- Quote from: Folco on May 19, 2010, 10:47:08 am ---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 ---

--- End quote ---

Try

--- Code: --- ./configure --with-contrib-plugins=all,-codesnippets
--- End code ---
Not absolutely sure about the comma (I'm forced to work on windows at the moment).


--- Code: ---./configure --help
--- End code ---
should show you the correct syntax.

Folco:
Thank you, I am performing tests.

Folco:
Ok, this script works fine, your tip is good !

--- Code: ---#/bin/sh
svn checkout http://svn.berlios.de/svnroot/repos/codeblocks/trunk
cd trunk
./bootstrap
make clean
./configure --with-contrib-plugins=all,-codesnippets
make
su -c 'make install'
--- End code ---
Thanks to you, I have now revision 6261 with the new logo 8)

stefanos_:
Hello guys and thanks for your replies. I don't think I have clarified my problem.

I think it would more appropriate if I would recall:

Under Windows, usually what I do is to download the latest SVN available revision code and open it with a stable Code::Blocks. I compile CodeBlocks.cbp and as soon as is finished, I close the current project and open ContribPlugins.workspace, choosing to compile workspace (so I may compile all plugins at once).

After it finished, I run the update.bat, and the necessary files are getting copied from devel directory to output after they get stripped.

Now, I can see that an update file exists for GNU / Linux environment(s) as well, but it does not behave exactly the same I would say. The reason I am saying this is because I run the same procedure as above for my Fedora, with the only difference, the update procedure. It didn't create the copies as I was expecting it to do so. Instead, I found a run.sh file and I had to execute it to test the changes.

After got disappointed, I had to go back to the traditional method, i.e. ./bootstrap, make, su -c 'make install' to make everything work.

Is it necessary to be like this? The Windows method is more convenient I would say.

Thanks again.

oBFusCATed:

--- Quote from: stefanos_ on May 24, 2010, 11:21:06 pm ---After got disappointed, I had to go back to the traditional method, i.e. ./bootstrap, make, su -c 'make install' to make everything work.

--- End quote ---
What is the problem with this method?
1. It is faster, because you don't leave the console
2. It installs C::B in the system path => everything works as expected (desktop and menu shortcuts)

The ./update script is used when you compile from .cbp files and it works fine... (I've just tested it)
The thing is that on unixes the dynamic linker (the one loading the dlls (.so on linux)) doesn't look in the current directory at all (if you don't tell it to do so) (this is for security).

p.s. keep in mind that linux is not windows and some things are done differently -> most of the time executables are placed in the system folders
p.p.s. what is your distro, there is a chance that you can find an automatic way to build the C::B package (.ebuild for gentoo, -src.deb for debian, -src.rpm redhad/suse/centos, PKGBUILD for archlinux)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page