RE: 1.90 demos

[Michael Roberts]

The makefiles were not getting regenerated by configure. Deleting
demo/Makefile and reconfiguring solves the problem and the demos build fine.
Duh !

regards

~m

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
> Behalf Of David Sugar
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 6:04 AM
> To: Michael Roberts
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: 1.90 demos
>
>
>
> The demos distributed with 1.9.0 should have a Makefile.in that is
> correct, and which refereces ../src and libccext.la for certain things.
> The Makefile.am appears correct for this to happen...
>
> David
>
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Michael Roberts wrote:
>
> >
> > I spend a couple of minutes today trying to get the demos
> compiling under
> > the 1.90 release.
> >
> > Between 1.6.0 and 1.9.0, it looks like a few things were moved from
> > CommonC++-X.X.X/posix to /src and possibly elsewhere. This
> broke references
> > to /posix files from demo/Makefile.in so that the configure
> generated demo
> > makefile does not work - it stumbles over refences to the files
> which were
> > in posix. A cursory substitution of /src for /posix in demo/Makefile.in
> > revealed that not everything had been moved from posix into src; I can
> > ferret around with it tomorrow if someone hasn't already fixed
> it - it would
> > be nice to have working examples.
> >
> > Let me know if that is too simple minded and if more major changes are
> > required to get the demos going.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > ~m
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-commoncpp mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-commoncpp
>