Technical support > Windows
NSIS Compilation Errors
odie:
--- Quote from: BTAxis on January 21, 2009, 02:56:23 pm ---You didn't compile radiant properly.
--- End quote ---
Hi BTAxis,
Hey again! Thanks. Yes i do.... i have been trying to make sense of the radiant issues but i cant seemed to compile them successfully.....
Could you pls direct me to the right link for this, or a way to get this running? It seemed i have onli managed to get this part by chance last time, and it did not work for me this time...
I have looked at every single search instance on "gtkradiant", "radiant" on the forum and none of them are helpful. Although i can do as Destructavator does, omitting the radiant / simply copying the radiant.exe and gtkradiant.exe into the folders and modifying the nsis script, i am still interested in getting it to compile properly.
None of the wiki seemed to address this gtk-thingy well...... although i stands to be corrected.
Many thanks for your patience, BTAxis.
:)
PS: And yes, i was a C programmer previously..... though haven touched that in years, now more of an IT administrator and network engineer. lol. And boy, do i love the extent of programming done in this.... i can so appreciate the TONS of hrs u folks must have put into the source code. :)
Muton:
ever tried this http://ufoai.ninex.info/forum/index.php?topic=3208.0 ?
I've merged all *.cmd's and procedures to build ufoai
incl. error checking
maybe you passed something
odie:
--- Quote from: Muton on January 22, 2009, 06:11:20 pm ---ever tried this http://ufoai.ninex.info/forum/index.php?topic=3208.0 ?
I've merged all *.cmd's and procedures to build ufoai
incl. error checking
maybe you passed something
--- End quote ---
Hi Muton, i have got all the batch files and procedures ran - "Codeblocks issues", "compile_maps /ufoai", "compile_maps /uforadiant", moving "\src\po\*.po" to "\base\i18n", NSIS compiler.
The step that was not clearly documented is well..... the radiant part. I clarify later, and perhaps get us a pdf manual....
--- Quote from: BTAxis on January 21, 2009, 02:56:23 pm ---You didn't compile radiant properly.
--- End quote ---
Hi Folks again! I am back!
Okie, i managed to compile the new version R21950 completely and successfully.
Thanks BTAxis for the concise issue on radiant. The issue WAS radiant, as i realised that codeblocks require both "BUILD" and "BUILD WORKSPACE". The "BUILD" option is for the main codings, whilst the "BUILD WORKSPACE" option is for compiling radiant and other environment.
BTAxis, perhaps you could let future beta testers / compilers know that this is a necessary option, as not everyone is familiar with Codeblocks. (Even though i was a C programmer for so long, i also do not use / come across codeblocks.....) That would really be helpful.
--- Quote from: Destructavator on January 14, 2009, 07:25:36 pm ---Odie, this might be somewhat of a long shot, but when you compiled in codeblocks did you choose "(re)build project" or "(re)build workspace"?
I've found when I put together the game for the installers I upload that choosing "project" with "ufo" activated doesn't build everything, so I select "rebuild workspace" in the codeblocks menu, which builds all the components including the language files, radiant, and ufo2map as well as the main game.
I just checked the wiki and saw it doesn't clarify this - the wiki might need an update if this is indeed the issue.
--- End quote ---
And why is Destructavator quoted? Because it was his very this point that got me to relook my procedures..... I have tried building w/o rebuilding workspace, or vice versa, but never both. And i did a CLEAN in between the procedures (duh, my bad mistake).......
Thanks Destructavator!
Nv knew that within CB: that Build and Build Workspace are different..... it was not so on my usual C or C++ compilers. lol.
Thanks again!
BTAxis:
--- Quote from: odie on January 23, 2009, 03:14:27 am ---Thanks BTAxis for the concise issue on radiant. The issue WAS radiant, as i realised that codeblocks require both "BUILD" and "BUILD WORKSPACE". The "BUILD" option is for the main codings, whilst the "BUILD WORKSPACE" option is for compiling radiant and other environment.
BTAxis, perhaps you could let future beta testers / compilers know that this is a necessary option, as not everyone is familiar with Codeblocks. (Even though i was a C programmer for so long, i also do not use / come across codeblocks.....) That would really be helpful.
--- End quote ---
This is not true. Build Workspace builds everything, from the game to the editor. You don't need both.
You should make it a habit to pick rebuild workspace (not build workspace), though. Building may skip some files it deems unchanged, and that can cause problems.
odie:
--- Quote from: BTAxis on January 23, 2009, 12:28:57 pm ---This is not true. Build Workspace builds everything, from the game to the editor. You don't need both.
You should make it a habit to pick rebuild workspace (not build workspace), though. Building may skip some files it deems unchanged, and that can cause problems.
--- End quote ---
Ah, BTAxis, i verified this again this morning when doing the R22076. If i were to just Build or Rebuild, it would not compile Radiant. Thats why need to Rebuild Workspace. Either way, from now, i will just clean workspace and Build Workspace from Scratch.
I will indeed spend sometime to do up the SVN guide bah in pdf. I will post somewhere once its done. :)
Thanks again for the helps!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version