[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [help-GIFT] Compile failure with gcc-4.1.2

From: Wulf C. Krueger
Subject: Re: [help-GIFT] Compile failure with gcc-4.1.2
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 12:59:57 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.9.5

Hello Gabor!

On Sunday, May 20, 2007 12:29:49 PM Gabor ROCZEI wrote:

> This is a short summary (I wrote it for the knowarcs people), use it:

Did you even read my original mail?

This is the error you sent patches for that are long in CVS (which I 
explicitly mentioned testing with):

> ../../libMRML/include/CAttributeList.h:82: error: extra qualification
> 'CAttributeList::' on member 'toXML'

A trivial extra qualification. I've patched that away from the tarballed 
versions long before posting here.

This is the error *I* get: error: cannot allocate an object of abstract type 'CAcPerl'
../../libGIFTAcPerl/include/CAcPerl.h:72: note:   because the following 
virtual functions are pure within 'CAcPerl':
../../libMRML/include/CAccessor.h:109: note:    virtual void 
CAccessor::getRandomIDs(std::list<int, std::allocator<int> >&, size_t) 
../../libMRML/include/CAccessor.h:119: note:    virtual void 
std::allocator<CAccessorElement> >&, size_t) const

Here gcc complains about purely virtual member functions from which it 
can't generate an object. This is *completely* different from the error 
you're referring to. 

I'm sorry if I sound ungrateful or impatient but I've been battling with 
gift for several days (and nights) now, I've done extensive searching on 
Google, the gift mailinglists (back to 2003, btw.), I've waded through 
tons of spam on the bug-gift mailinglist hoping to find something 
meaningful there, I've bugged people with better C++ skills than myself, 
I've searched Debian, ArchLinux, OpenPKG and lots of other (meta-) 
distributions to find how they deal with this problem (they don't have a 
patch for this either), I've consulted lots of bugtrackers to see how 
people dealt with other applications with the same problem.
I've checked *all* the patchsets posted by Julia "risc" Longtin to this 
very list. I've experimented with the code of 0.1.14 and 0.1.15b myself 
and patched away lots of other issues (yes, I've compared my patches with 
latest CVS and they're all in there or I would have submitted them).
Heck, I've even checked the PRs for gcc 4.1.2 to see what changed in gcc 
to work around it. 

Only then did I post here because I didn't want to bother anyone with 
stuff I could easily fix myself.

So maybe you can understand now why I'm not too happy about your 
answer. :-)

No offence intended and best regards, Wulf

Attachment: pgpYHqCpI0eaq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

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