Re: octave-dock-widget.cc: new file missing

[Ben Abbott]

On Jun 22, 2013, at 3:30 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:

> On 06/22/2013 02:12 AM, Ben Abbott wrote:
>> On Jun 22, 2013, at 2:53 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
>> 
>>> On 06/22/2013 01:24 AM, Ben Abbott wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Jun 22, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Ben Abbott wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jun 22, 2013, at 1:13 PM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 06/21/2013 09:45 PM, Ben Abbott wrote:
>>>>>>> Torsten,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You forgot to add the new file octave-dock-widget.cc when you pushed 
>>>>>>> the changeset below.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>         http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/d749c9b588e5
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ben
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Seems to work here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The modification takes a bit of getting used to.  Undocking then 
>>>>>> redocking via the button results in the widget in a different location 
>>>>>> from when it was undocked.  Once it is docked, then it can be moved 
>>>>>> around to get it back to the original spot.  The new buttons are someone 
>>>>>> big too, using valuable space (at least in my case since I don't have a 
>>>>>> real big screen).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dan
>>>>> 
>>>>> I encountered the stuff below, and assumed the file was missing.  
>>>>> However, it is included, so I'll start with configure and see how it goes 
>>>>> from there.
>>>> 
>>>> After configure + make, I stiil get the error below.
>>> 
>>> Strange.  It definitely looks like an object file is missing from your 
>>> link.  Here is what I'm seeing in my build directory for object files:
>>> 
>>> [build-gui-11]# find -name *octave-dock-widget*
>>> ./libgui/src/moc-octave-dock-widget.cc
>>> ./libgui/src/src_libgui_src_la-moc-octave-dock-widget.lo
>>> ./libgui/src/.libs/src_libgui_src_la-moc-octave-dock-widget.o
>>> ./libgui/src/.libs/src_libgui_src_la-octave-dock-widget.o
>>> ./libgui/src/.deps/src_libgui_src_la-octave-dock-widget.Plo
>>> ./libgui/src/.deps/src_libgui_src_la-moc-octave-dock-widget.Plo
>>> ./libgui/src/src_libgui_src_la-octave-dock-widget.lo
>>> 
>>> Dan
>> 
>> 
>> This is what I see in my sources.
>> 
>> find . -name *octave-dock-widget*
>> ./.hg/store/data/libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.cc.i
>> ./.hg/store/data/libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.h.i
>> ./libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.cc
>> ./libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.h
> 
> That's correct.
> 
>> And below is the result where I build.
>> 
>> $ find . -name *octave-dock-widget*
>> ./.hg/store/data/libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.cc.i
>> ./.hg/store/data/libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.h.i
>> ./libgui/src/.deps/src_libgui_src_la-moc-octave-dock-widget.Plo
>> ./libgui/src/.libs/src_libgui_src_la-moc-octave-dock-widget.o
>> ./libgui/src/moc-octave-dock-widget.cc
>> ./libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.cc
>> ./libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.h
>> ./libgui/src/src_libgui_src_la-moc-octave-dock-widget.lo
>> 
>> Any help would be appreciated.
> 
> Somehow there is a hidden directory for mercurial in your build directory.  I 
> don't think that should be there, but at the same time I don't know how that 
> would cause a problem when building.  But also there is
> 
>> ./libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.cc
>> ./libgui/src/octave-dock-widget.h
> 
> in your build directory.  Those should only be in the source tree.  The 
> following is a derived file:

On MacOS X, I've not been able to build outside of my source tree .... so I 
clone my sources a second time and build there.

>> ./libgui/src/moc-octave-dock-widget.cc
> 
> (it contains Qt information necessary for communicating via signals and 
> slots) so that should (repeat should) be in the build directory.  These three 
> are missing:
> 
>>> ./libgui/src/.libs/src_libgui_src_la-octave-dock-widget.o
>>> ./libgui/src/.deps/src_libgui_src_la-octave-dock-widget.Plo
>>> ./libgui/src/src_libgui_src_la-octave-dock-widget.lo
> 
> and that's where the object code you are missing is located.  It's as though 
> your configure isn't correct, or maybe something was messed up with your 
> repository.  I'm guessing, but did you try hg pull/update while in your build 
> directory?  (I don't know enough about mercurial to know wether that is good 
> or bad.)

As far as I know all is up to date.  Is there anyway a old or too new verions 
of flex, autoconf, or automake could be responsiblle?  I'll take a look at that 
in a while (I have an errand to run now).

Ben