[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] CMake builds vs Autotools builds

From: Tom Rondeau
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] CMake builds vs Autotools builds
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 18:02:43 -0500

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Alexandru Csete <address@hidden> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Tom Rondeau <address@hidden> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Josh Blum <address@hidden> wrote:
>>     http://gnuradio.org/cgit/gnuradio.git/commit/?id=56fcd5f9b22af33976f9413d3a9d0aec41a7b556
>>     -josh
>> Marcus, would you be up for trying that? The resulting la files do not
>> match what comes out of autotools. We don't know if they will work,
>> despite their differences, and it'd be good to know.
>> Thanks,
>> Tom
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> Yeah, I'll give it a try tommorow evening sometime.  Farking day job
> gets in the way of all the
>   fun stuff :-(

This was fixed a month ago. Just clean your install.



I believe the problem is that he NEEDS the .la files for the gr-fcd compilation. So either the gr-fcd would have to be worked on to link a different way, or we would have to provide the .la files (and make sure they are correct).

Actually, gr-fcd can link against .so but apparently the autotools prefer .la if they are present.
I had issue with the cmake generated .la file a month ago and Josh suggested to disable generation of .la files, see


Alright, good. Just making sure we didn't actually need the .la files. Which is good, since making them "correctly" (that is, identical to the output of autotools) could have been a real pain.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]