#ifndef _SQ_PLUS_H_
#define _SQ_PLUS_H_
#include <stdlib.h>
#ifdef __APPLE__
#include <malloc/malloc.h>
#elif !defined(__FREEBSD__)
#include <malloc.h>
#endif
#include <memory.h>
Open that file and change "#include <malloc.h>" to "#include <cstdlib>".
And be sure to tell us if it worked or not so we can make the change in our repository...
autorevision.h:14: error: 'encoding' was not declared in this scope
/*encoding="utf-8"?>*/
#ifndef AUTOREVISION_H
#define AUTOREVISION_H
#include <wx/string.h>
#define SVN_REVISION "encoding="utf-8"?>"
#define SVN_DATE "<entry"
namespace autorevision
{
const unsigned int svn_revision = encoding="utf-8"?>;
const wxString svnRevision(_T("encoding="utf-8"?>"));
}
#endif
In case you wondered, that looks... wrong. :-PThat's right - it's wrong. The reason is that he isn't using a recent svn (>version 1.2). This is no longer supported. I suggest you (Russell) upgrade your svn before continuing...
svn --version --quiet
I did notice that at the start of the build, it mentioned something about a locale, not entirely sure if thats what it would be.
We so need to...
Hey, another idea: Why don't we put the sources out our prefered svn version into build_tools... ?! *lol* :lol: :mrgreen: ;-)We so need to...No need to do anything, these are old issues. [...]
What did you think about fixing update_revision.sh / using autotools, by the way ? We should make that shell script and autorevision.cpp work the same way, in order to avoid confusion...Sorry, not having a clear head yet today (never talk to me before 10...).
You mean to modify the script you wrote that copies the generated header into the release tarball? Or do you mean to add a line to configure so it aborts when it doesn't find svn?
Or do you mean to add a line to configure so it aborts when it doesn't find svn?
I mean modify the build scripts so that autotools would generate both revision.m4 and src/sdk/autorevision.h from the current SVN info, either cached in a "dist" tarball or retrieved from the "svn" client ?For "dist" tarballs, the revision should already be "coded in". Generating the header file during make dist and including it in the tarball makes sense.
The Fedora Core package already patches out autorevision entirelly, for instance (and writes out the code for src/sdk/autorevision.h itself)Well, that's bad, very bad.
I don't think that the build should require svn, if all the info is there.It should not and it does not.
It wouldn't "abort", would it ? But run with REVISION=0 and DATE="", yes ?Well, I don't know ;)
However, the reason why autorevision exists at all is that one tool should do the same on all platforms instead of a dozen different scripts for a dozen platforms, each doing something else and each having to be maintained.I think autorevision.cpp is a great fallback for Windows (ignoring for a moment that MinGW does have autotools), but it will only be needed if src/sdk/autorevision.h is missing ? And autotools is good for generating e.g. codeblocks.spec and codeblocks.plist, unless you wanted to do those in C++ as well ?
The same executable does the same thing under Windows (where you have no such thing as autotools) and Linux, or whatever OS. It's not like I would not have preferred 2 lines of script in the first place, but that just doesn't work out.
So I was trying to make it better, by providing a means to avoid it.QuoteThe Fedora Core package already patches out autorevision entirelly, for instance (and writes out the code for src/sdk/autorevision.h itself)Well, that's bad, very bad.
Except to make it / keep it working the same way as autorevision.QuoteIt wouldn't "abort", would it ? But run with REVISION=0 and DATE="", yes ?Well, I don't know ;)
That's what autorevision does. No need to add anything in configure for that effect.
(ignoring for a moment that MinGW does have autotools)MinGW does not have automake, you can use automake with MSYS though. However, we don't seriously consider building Code::Blocks with MSYS, do we :)
And autotools is good for generating e.g. codeblocks.spec and codeblocks.plist, unless you wanted to do those in C++ as well ?Meknows nothing of specs and plists, but since these are RPM stuff, so Linux only, autotools is of course the right thing to use for that.
On a side note, I think the wx-config.cpp (http://wxconfig.googlepages.com/) addition will be great too.Great for what? I don't understand what we should need it for (apart from the fact that I was told it does not work)?
I meant MSYS, sorry... Actually I meant "a real shell" :-)(ignoring for a moment that MinGW does have autotools)MinGW does not have automake, you can use automake with MSYS though.
However, we don't seriously consider building Code::Blocks with MSYS, do we :)Why not ? I don't see why it shouldn't (eventually) work
MinGW has no such thing as sed or any other non-compiler-non-linker tool coming with a standard installation. How do you implement parsing svn's output and writing out a header file with gcc, as, and ld being your only tools? Enter autorevision. That was the whole reason why it ever came into existence :)You don't, you write a program... C++, Perl, whatever. (no argument there)
They are not RPM/Linux only, they are just text files with a @REVISION@ value that wants to get replaced ?QuoteAnd autotools is good for generating e.g. codeblocks.spec and codeblocks.plist, unless you wanted to do those in C++ as well ?Meknows nothing of specs and plists, but since these are RPM stuff, so Linux only, autotools is of course the right thing to use for that.
Great so that I can use the same `wx-config --cxxflags --libs` everywhere, without having to write one thing for the GNU tools, one thing for Windows and one thing for Mac OS X ? Too bad that you say it doesn't work, though. (I was really hoping for a solution to my current wxWidgets-on-Windows-without-MSYS problem)QuoteOn a side note, I think the wx-config.cpp (http://wxconfig.googlepages.com/) addition will be great too.Great for what? I don't understand what we should need it for (apart from the fact that I was told it does not work)?
(ignoring for a moment that MinGW does have autotools)MinGW does not have automake, you can use automake with MSYS though. However, we don't seriously consider building Code::Blocks with MSYS, do we :)
MinGW has no such thing as sed or any other non-compiler-non-linker tool coming with a standard installation. How do you implement parsing svn's output and writing out a header file with gcc, as, and ld being your only tools? Enter autorevision. That was the whole reason why it ever came into existence :)QuoteAnd autotools is good for generating e.g. codeblocks.spec and codeblocks.plist, unless you wanted to do those in C++ as well ?Meknows nothing of specs and plists, but since these are RPM stuff, so Linux only, autotools is of course the right thing to use for that.QuoteOn a side note, I think the wx-config.cpp (http://wxconfig.googlepages.com/) addition will be great too.Great for what? I don't understand what we should need it for (apart from the fact that I was told it does not work)?
LANG=C
export LANG
if svn --xml info >/dev/null 2>&1; then
REV=`svn --xml info | tr -d '\r\n' | sed -e 's/.*<commit.*revision="\([0-9]*\)".*<\/commit>.*/\1/'`
LCD=`svn --xml info | tr -d '\r\n' | sed -e 's/.*<commit.*<date>\([0-9\-]*\)\T\([0-9\:]*\)\..*<\/date>.*<\/commit>.*/\1 \2/'`
elif svn --version --quiet >/dev/null 2>&1; then
REV=`svn info | grep "^Revision:" | cut -d" " -f2`
LCD=`svn info | grep "^Last Changed Date:" | cut -d" " -f4,5`
else
REV=0
LCD=""
fi
Here was the updated shell code: (to use XML as the first option)Looks like it should work fine.
can you tell me who told you and when
Who: Someone who I believe. :)
i used your wx-config-win too and it works very well indeed.nor
there is only one big problem: codecompletion isn't working when
you setup your cb-project using wx-config, because the path to the
include files isn't know for CB during editing.
I've also been using wx-config-win of late, and it works very well - nice work!at least.
I was just thinking how nice it would be to have a wizard using it ... :D
I'm don't remember for sure who said it (there are 3 possible candidates, and I shan't point at someone without being 100% sure), but out of the three people who are in question, I'd believe anyone.Me and tiwag have tested it not more than enough but fairly enough, so it would be nice whoever said it, can submit any issue found to the issue tracker, it will be much appreciated;
/*@REVISION@*/
#ifndef AUTOREVISION_H
#define AUTOREVISION_H
#include <wx/string.h>
#define SVN_REVISION "@REVISION@"
#define SVN_DATE "@DATE@"
namespace autorevision
{
const unsigned int svn_revision = @REVISION@;
const wxString svnRevision(_T("@REVISION@"));
}
#endif