Re: [boost] [OpenOffice] [Boost_Document_Library] [GSoC'15] Unable to compile and run the examples in the OpenOffice SDK

Subject: Re: [boost] [OpenOffice] [Boost_Document_Library] [GSoC'15] Unable to compile and run the examples in the OpenOffice SDK
From: Rob Stewart (rob.stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-04-23 04:49:01

On April 22, 2015 10:58:46 PM EDT, Abhinav Tripathi <ee130002001_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Thanks Rob.
> Can you please tell what things should I add to PATH?

The directory containing the applications you copied to /bin would have been the first addition to PATH. Beyond that, it's a question of finding the pieces that agent found on the PATH, and adding their directories. You can run find /opt/openoffice 64 -type f -name foo, for example.

> And one more thing, there is no file in the directory :
> ../../../../LINUXexample.out/bin
> It is empty always even after after compiling anything!

Perhaps you're starting from the wrong directory? As I mentioned, the make variable OUT_BIN may be getting defined wrong for your purposes, leading to all of those ../. Have you tried searching for a directory named LINUXexample.out?

> So if you could explain the Makefile line :
> %.run: $(OUT_BIN)/%$(EXE_EXT)
> cd $(subst /,$(PS),$(OUT_BIN)) && $(basename $@)

When you run make foo.run, $(OUT_BIN)/%$(EXE_EXT) is built of it doesn't exist, then the command is run.

The $(subst) just ensures the right path separator is used for the platform.

$(basename $@) computes foo.run from the /some/path/foo.run you type.

> I mean after cding...  It is using
> " && $(basename $@)" is it enough to run any program from makefile?

They apparently think it is appropriate for all of their tools.

> Shouldn't it have a prefix of "./".

They are, it seems, assuming ./ in your PATH. Even better would be the following:

set PATH=$(subst /,$(PS),$(OUT_BIN)):$ PATH && $@

However, you'd need another platform specific variable for : vs. ; to make that generic.

> I am just guessing, I have absolutely no idea here. I just went
> through
> what basename does in a makefile and it seemed strange to me.

The ./ assumption is definitely worth reporting as a bug. The rest of the issues could be something you've missed, whether because you didn't see some file with instructions or because they weren't included in the packages you installed.

It's also possible that the packages are broken. They could be mixing incompatible files.

I think you'll have to rely on searching the web and the OpenOffice developers' forums or mailing lists for anything more.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)