[Top][All Lists]

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

Octave 3.0.0 and HDF5 1.8.0 compilation error

From: jdelia
Subject: Octave 3.0.0 and HDF5 1.8.0 compilation error
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:57:46 -0300
User-agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4)

Dear developers,

My compilation problem of Octave 3.0.0 including the HDF5 1.8.0 library was
fixed following the suggestion of the Project's Boss.

Really, the full package compilation is now successful and it is very nice.

As a second personal error, I have not answered on the list so others may comment. I apologise for this flaw. Here there is an email' summary.


Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:51:28 -0500 [06:51:28 ART]
From: "John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: problems compiling Octave 3.0.0 and HDF5 1.8.0

On 20-Feb-2008, address@hidden wrote:

| I'm trying to compile Octave 3.0.0 with all packages. If the HDF5 | 1.8.0 one is omitted the compilation and testing is successful but | if this package is included the compilation broken with the error | messages:
| .........
| error: invalid conversion from ,Ab??herr_t (**)(hid_t, | void*),Ab?? to ,Ab??hid_t,Ab?? | error: invalid conversion from ,Ab??void**,Ab?? to | ,Ab??herr_t (**)(hid_t, void*),Ab?? | /usr/local/hdf5/1.8.0/include/H5Epublic.h:173: error: too few | arguments to function ,Ab??herr_t H5Eget_auto2(hid_t, herr_t (**)(hid_t, | void*), void**),Ab??

It looks like you need to build your HDF5 library so that it provides
the 1.6.x HDF5 API by default.

See the info here, for example:


 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:36:36 -0300 [07:36:36 ART]
 From: address@hidden
 To: "John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>
 Subject: Re: Octave 3.0.0 and HDF5 1.8.0 compilation error

 Dear John,

 Thanks for your fast reply.

Your configure log starts with:
 checking build system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
 checking host system type... i686-pc-linux-gnu
What Linux distribution are you using,

 In that machine it is a Fedora 5.

and why are you (apparently) going to all the trouble of building all these packages like HDF5 from source yourself?

 There were not any problems with the installation and testing of all these
 packages. Also, there is not any problem in building Octave 3.0.0 when the
 HDF package is excluded (really it is very nice).

Why not use binary packages for those?

 These packages (and other related ones) were installed before by request of
 other users for another applications.

For that matter, why not use a binary package for Octave?

That went my first suggestion to the interested users, but they asked to me if all updated packages came with the distribution. Nevertheless, the present compilation is sufficient for these users.
 I am only something intrigued of why the make failed in the HPF5 phase.

Thanks for your time.


This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Attachment: make-check.log.gz
Description: Unix tar archive

Attachment: configure.log.gz
Description: Unix tar archive

reply via email to

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