Code::Blocks Forums

User forums => Using Code::Blocks => Topic started by: sasq on November 22, 2005, 05:13:39 pm

Title: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: sasq on November 22, 2005, 05:13:39 pm
Hello.
I have compiled wxGTK-2.4.2.tgz
Everything goes fine.
Next, i have downloaded release from CVS [sources from download page didn't run, I've got errors in ./bootstrap].
Bootstrap for CVS version goes OK, so as ./configure.
But after calling "make" i have the following error:

Code
In file included from bindings/sc_wxarraystring.cpp:4:
bindings/sc_wxarraystring.h:20:23: wx/arrstr.h: No such file or directory
bindings/sc_wxarraystring.cpp: In function `wxString& StringAt(unsigned int,
   scWxArrayString&)':
bindings/sc_wxarraystring.cpp:48: error: `size' undeclared (first use this
   function)
bindings/sc_wxarraystring.cpp:48: error: (Each undeclared identifier is
   reported only once for each function it appears in.)

What's wrong and how to fix it?
I am phuckin' with this since two days and still don't have C::B running on my Aurox 9.1 box ;(
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: rickg22 on November 22, 2005, 05:30:08 pm
OK Um, first of all, the CVS version of codeblocks requires wxWidgets 2.6.1. Second, i think some of the files are in DOS format, you need to run dos2unix on them. There was some info on the forums, but I don't remember where... sorry
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: Michael on November 22, 2005, 05:46:41 pm
Second, i think some of the files are in DOS format, you need to run dos2unix on them. There was some info on the forums, but I don't remember where... sorry

May be here?

http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,733.0.html

If not a fast search in the forum can be helpful.

Best wishes,
Michael
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: sasq on November 22, 2005, 06:35:18 pm
Quote from: rickg22
OK Um, first of all, the CVS version of codeblocks requires wxWidgets 2.6.1.

NOW you tell me? :|
OK, i have downloaded wxWidgets-2.6.2, compilled and installed OK according to Tutorial on Wiki.
When I "make" the C::B sources next, the compilation goes a while longer, and I get a nice stuff of errors in my face. There is so many errors, so I paste only a few first of that:

Code
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:15: error: `cbProject' was not declared in this scope
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:15: error: `p' was not declared in this scope
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:15: error: variable or field `DummyAddRef' declared void
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:15: error: syntax error before `{' token
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:16: error: `cbProject' was not declared in this scope
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:16: error: `p' was not declared in this scope
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:16: error: variable or field `DummyRelease' declared void
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:16: error: syntax error before `{' token
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp: In function `void gDebugLog(const wxString&)':
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:36: error: `DBGLOG' undeclared (first use this function)
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:36: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in.)
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp: In function `wxString gReplaceMacros(const wxString&, bool)':
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:39: error: `Manager' undeclared (first use this function)
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:39: error: syntax error before `::' token
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp: In function `void Register_ConfigManager(asIScriptEngine*)':
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:88: error: `wxConfigBase' undeclared (first use this function)
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:88: error: syntax error before `::' token
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:88: error: `::Convert' undeclared (first use here)
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:88: error: syntax error before `::' token
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:88: error: syntax error before `&' token
bindings/scriptbindings.cpp:89: error: syntax error before `::' token

etc.
Why it's so HARD to compile?? I have tried so many ways and still i got errors.
Why don't you write exactly what libs and stuff are needed, how to compile it troublelessly and have fun?

Quote from: rickg22
Second, i think some of the files are in DOS format, you need to run dos2unix on them. There was some info on the forums, but I don't remember where... sorry

Not in CVS-version AFAIK..
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: thomas on November 22, 2005, 06:45:28 pm
Aurox 9.1 ships with gcc 3.2.2, maybe you want to use a more recent version?
We use 3.4.4 for development, and although it should probably work with 3.2 too, this might be a reason (gcc 3.2 does not support precompiled headers, so it is possible that a few things are undefined because some #includes are missing, and we never notice that because it works.) You might try turning precompiled headers off too (if I knew how you do that...).
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: rickg22 on November 22, 2005, 06:48:11 pm
Also, please accept our apologies. This week we implemented some major changes in CVS, and a few things broke - including, it seems, some parts of the linux compilation process (it compiles alright under windows, tho).

Um, Yiannis, mind giving us a hand in here? ;-)
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: Der Meister on November 22, 2005, 06:52:21 pm
As we discoverd in this thread (http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php/topic,1404.0.html) Code::Blocks still compiles properly (at least the current CVS from last sunday) if a recent compiler (at least gcc 3.4) ist used. (Only one include-path seemed to be missing.)
But compiling without precompiled headers seems to be a bigger issue.
Title: Re: Code::Blocks + Linux = trouble
Post by: sasq on November 22, 2005, 10:00:47 pm
:lol: i don't believe THAT was the cause! :P
I have compiled wxGTK version 2.6.2 and used Source-RPM. Now it WORKS! :)
All compiled well, only I have had to "force" the output RPM because its dependencies.
Looks like someone has forgot to change the Tutorial on Wiki - it is still for wxGTK-2.4.2 there, but the new CVS and Source-RPM is based on wxGTK-2.6.2. Thanx good man for 2 days of good fun ;P and thanx you guys for hints ;)