I'm playing around with MonoDevelop on Mint12 Linux and seem to be having problems with getting it to generate Makefiles. I create a new GTK# solution, test that it does indeed create a blank window when run, and then hit Project -> Generate Makefiles.
The following is the output in the Tool output window:
Generating Makefiles for Solution test2
Creating Makefile for Solution test2
Creating Makefile for Project test2
Makefiles could not be generated: . Cannot handle unknown runtime version ClrVersion.'Net_4_0'.
any help finding a solution to this would be appreciated. My ultimate goal is to figure out the process involved in generating a .DEB file.
You installed the IDE, but not all the development tools. Go into Mint's package manager and install this:
mono-complete:
This is a metapackage and pulls in the Mono runtime, development tools and all libraries.
Related
I'm compiling this PCL Library example. For reference, it consists of a simple cpp file that includes some PCL headers and does some basic data manipulation, and a CMakeLists.txt file.
Using the command line, I am able to build it using cmake -> make. I want to build it also using VSCode IDE. When I open this project on VSCode, it detects I'm using cmake, and if I clean/build it using the cmake extension, everything seems to work as expected (including autocompletion by intellisense, etc).
However, this takes some time as it builds the whole project in the same way you would do it from the command line, only from VSCode. I wanted to understand if I can also configure a "default build task" (via the tasks.json file) to build files using Ctrl + Shift + B, and be able to build individual files, and have a more IDE-Like experience (something like the incremental compiler of Eclipse with Java, for example).
If I add a C++ configuration, it fails to find .h files, and errors are highlighted on the open file, until I clean/rebuild via de cmake extension.
My question is, are this two options (cmake extension vs build tasks) compatible or mutually exclusive? Is defining and compiling via a task in fact more agile than building via the cmake extension?
Thanks!
In one of our projects we have used Gstreamer good plugins. I see that each element has a Makefile for building.
Now I wanted to upgrade rtpmanager code (https://github.com/GStreamer/gst-plugins-good/tree/master/gst/rtpmanager) inside Gstreamer. But, I see that there are no Makfiles anymore but 'meson.build' file.
Currently our project build does not support meson. So, is there a way to convert the latest rtpmanager code involving meson.build to traditional Makefile kind of build so that I can integrate its latest changes into my project.
Meson does not and never will generate makefiles.
Qemu meson PoC is using a tool to convert ninja files to Makefile:
https://github.com/bonzini/qemu/blob/meson-poc/scripts/ninjatool.py
The library mylib consists of the library proper, in directory lib/, and a test suite, in directory test/. It is completely under CMake control:
mylib/CMakeLists.txt:
...
add_subdirectory(lib)
add_subdirectory(test)
...
mylib/lib/CMakeLists.txt:
...
add_library(my_lib ${src_files})
...
mylib/test/CMakeLists.txt:
...
add_executable(mytest mytest.c)
target_link_libraries(mytest mylib)
Build steps are:
mkdir build
cd build
cmake ..
make
ctest # or make test
make install
Works under Linux, stable since many years. Under Windows10 though, a message window pops up, entitled "mytest.exe - System error": "The code execution cannot proceed because mylib.dll was not found. Reinstalling the program may fix this problem."
No, installing (rather than reinstalling) would not be a good solution: I need to first test the library before I install it (btw: this excludes most solutions proposed in response to somewhat similar questions).
Isn't CMake supposed to work cross-platform? What is the minimally invasive adjustment to make the above build steps work under Windows?
The right way of doing this on Windows is to populate the PATH environment variable for the test run:
set_tests_properties(your_test_name
PROPERTIES
ENVIRONMENT PATH="path-containing-your-dll")
I believe you can use generator expression if path-containing-your-dll is a function of an artifact that you generate in your build.
Cherry on top: since cmake 3.13, the variable VS_DEBUGGER_ENVIRONMENT can also be set on the target for having a nice debugging behaviour inside Visual Studio (eg. being able to debug the application directly from Visual instead of going through ctest).
I'm developing a C++ application in Code::Blocks.
My program has a few dependencies and has to run under Linux and Windows, this is why
I use Code::Blocks.
Now I'd like to include Travis CI for testing the builds.
On the Travis server, where I have no X11, I won't be able to run Code::Blocks. How can I build my project without Code::Blocks. (Is there a possibility to create "a Makefile" out of the .cbp-file?
This page (Code::Blocks Wiki) mentions there is a --build flag, but you need Code::Blocks & X11. Is there a server way without X11?
You can not run anything which require X11 on Travis, and as far as I know, there is no way to launch a build using Code::Blocks without requiring X11.
The best choice would be to set up your project differently, for example using a Makefile. You will be able to configure Code::Blocks to use your Makefile and also to build on Travis using the make command.
You can also consider using CMake (especially if you are not familiar with Makefile syntax, but not only). This will let you configure your project in a more high level way (compared to a Makefile), and then you will be able to generate a Makefile or a project for the IDE of your choice.
I used cbp2make (C::B Forum entry).
It is quite simple
cbp2make -in project.cbp -out Makefile
and it worked immediatly, even with a more complex configuration
than a simple command line project in Code::Blocks.
It also generates the same build targets as in Code::Blocks. For example make Release would work.
The debian package list shows only a few dependencies, so X11 is not required.
Simple question. Are there any tools for generating Xcode projects from the command line? We use SCons to build our cross-platform application, but that doesn't support intrinsic Xcode project generation. We'd like to avoid creating the project manually, since this would involve maintaining multiple file lists.
Look at CMake. You can generate XCode projects from it automatically. I found a previous StackOverflow question about its usage here. To get it to generate an XCode project, you use it as such:
CMake -G xcode
You can use premake (http://industriousone.com/premake) to generate Xcode projects. It can also generate Visual Studio projects.
For the benefit of anyone who lands on this question, I’ve actually just pushed an Xcode project file generator for SCons up to Bitbucket.
I think that your question should be "Is there a way to generate an XCode project from a SCons one?". I suppose, by your asking and by reading the others, that the answer is 'no'.
SCons people should know it better. I think they will be happy if you contribute a SCons Xcode project generator.
In the meantime you may choose to switch to CMake or to create your XCode project by hand that, given a good source tree organization, may be the best pragmatic solution.
qmake in the Qt toolchain generates Xcode projects. You can at least download it and take a look at its source here (LGPL).
You can generate a XCode project using the python based build system called waf. You need to download and install waf with the xcode6 extension:
$ curl -o waf-1.9.7.tar.bz2 https://waf.io/waf-1.9.7.tar.bz2
$ tar xjvf waf-1.9.7.tar.bz2
$ cd waf-1.9.7
$ ./waf-light --tools=xcode6
That will create a waf executable which can build your project. You need to configure how to generate your XCode project inside a file called wscript that should reside in your project folder. The wscript file uses Python syntax. Here's an example of how you could configure your project:
def configure(conf):
# Use environment variables to set default project configuration
# settings
conf.env.FRAMEWORK_VERSION = '1.0'
conf.env.ARCHS = 'x86_64'
# This must be called at the end of configure()
conf.load('xcode6')
# This will build a XCode project with one target with type 'framework'
def build(bld):
bld.load('xcode6')
bld.framework(
includes='include',
# Specify source files.
# This will become the groups (folders) inside XCode.
# Pass a dictionary to group by name. Use a list to add everything in one
source_files={
'MyLibSource': bld.path.ant_glob('src/MyLib/*.cpp|*.m|*.mm'),
'Include': bld.path.ant_glob(incl=['include/MyLib/*.h', 'include'], dir=True)
},
# export_headers will put the files in the
# 'Header Build Phase' in Xcode - i.e tell XCode to ship them with your .framework
export_headers=bld.path.ant_glob(incl=['include/MyLib/*.h', 'include/MyLib/SupportLib'], dir=True),
target='MyLib',
install='~/Library/Frameworks'
)
There are a bunch of settings you can use to configure it for your project.
Then to actually generate the XCode project, cd into your project folder where the wscript is and run your waf executable like
$ ./waf configure xcode6
A promising alternative to CMake which can generate Xcode projects is xmake. I haven’t tried it yet, but it looks good from the documentation.
Install xmake, create a simple project file (xmake.lua):
target("test")
add_files("src/*.cpp")
Then you can either do a command-line build:
xmake
or create an Xcode project:
xmake project -k xcode
Note that currently xmake seems to invoke CMake to generate the Xcode project, although they say they plan to add native Xcode project generation at some point.
You could use Automator to generate them for you.
I checked and there is no prebuilt action.
Therefore you would have to record your actions with Automator to do this.