OSX Build problems

[Jeroen Massar]

On 2016-03-15 18:59, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 06:42:21PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> [TLDR: Full intent to provide proper patches, but I need it then to
>> build first as then I can debug the real problem: why the heck I get
>> segfaults when just running the tool and asking it to download from my
>> watch ;)  --- note the smileys and good intentions throughout... ]
> 
> Excellent! Sorry for my grumpy email.

Shite happens, good that I have a thick skin (keeps me quite warm most
of the time as well, unfortunately not warm enough to not need a thick
piece of neoprene when diving Swiss lakes ;)

>> On 2016-03-15 18:20, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've been attempting to build subsurface also for a bit, with little
>>>> success. The dctool indeed hit me, but as per IRC, that was easily
>>>> circumvented... The QT thing seems to be way more annoying though.
>>>
>>> The funny thing is - we have about four people (optimistically speaking)
>>> who build on Mac and two who build for Windows (one ON Windows). So to me
>>> it constantly feels like I am spending a LOT of time on making sure
>>> everyone can build for not a lot of value.
>>
>> Understood, hence why my target is to, when the build works, do a clean
>> build to make sure the build instructions are sane for everybody who
>> follows and provide those details so that it can be replicated.
> 
> Looking forward to that. I assume you are building master and not
> v4.5-branch - I may want to make sure I track your patches for that as
> well so it's easier to build 4.5.4.

Yep, I am going against master.

The build script nicely pulls in the relevant other repos, which is a
useful thing to do.

>> I just did not get a full build going yet, and as I noticed the patch
>> for the path of Qt, thought I add my few intermediary cents just in case
>> somebody else knew how to attack the problem.
> 
> Since there are a few of us who have builds going, I'm sure we can figure
> this out.
> 
>>>> My current list of homebrew build depends is quite a bit more than on
>>>> the website:
>>>> brew qt5 install automake autoconf libtool libusb libssh2 pkgconfig hidapi
>>>
>>> So let's fix that.
>>> Oh, that's not complete, either. It misses asciidoc (ok, I guess one could
>>> call that optional) and cmake (definitely not optional).
>>>
>>> OK, done.
>>
>> Great, thanks.
>>
>> As noted, will test on an empty OSX install and then record all the
>> individual steps when I get it build, thus making sure that rebuilding
>> will be easy peasy for everybody in the future.
> 
> add libxml2 to that list and see if that fixes your problem with the
> include path.

Adding: set(CMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE ON) to the CMakeLists.txt makes me a
bit wiser that there seems to be a detection issue on my box, as the
actual compile command is:

cd /Users/jeroen/git/subsurface/subsurface/build/subsurface-core &&
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/bin/cc
-DBT_SUPPORT -DQT_BLUETOOTH_LIB
[... lots of stuff ...]  -I/usr/include/libxml2 [... more stuff ]
 -c /Users/jeroen/git/subsurface/subsurface/subsurface-core/cochran.c
In file included from
/Users/jeroen/git/subsurface/subsurface/subsurface-core/cochran.c:12:
/Users/jeroen/git/subsurface/subsurface/subsurface-core/dive.h:38:10:
fatal error: 'libxml/tree.h' file not found


yeah... that is not going to work, as /usr/include/ really does not
exist on this box ;)

I will figure out why/how it thinks that is correct.


Note btw that the homebrew version of libxml2 is not linked in
/usr/local/ per default, thus I don't think that cmake will find it
either even if you have it installed, as:

 /usr/local/Cellar/libxml2/2.9.3/lib/cmake/libxml2/libxml2-config.cmake
 /usr/local/Cellar/libxml2/2.9.3/lib/pkgconfig/libxml-2.0.pc

are definitely outside the cmake search path.

I'll read up on how:
/usr/local/Cellar/cmake/3.5.0/share/cmake/Modules/FindLibXml2.cmake

gets used, as that discovers the include path and obviously that goes
wrong on my box.

[..]
>> I primarily noted that in the style of "I have a learning curve to
>> figure out what the heck is going wrong" :)
> 
> And I primarily responded in the style of "I'm pissed off by now".
> Sorry about that.

I have had this exact situation: 100 people complain, and then when you
have had it, you reply to person 101 who actually was not ;)

Happens, next!

[..]
>> Not a fair comparison really, me being the new user trying to help out.
> 
> Yes. I agree. That was cheap and uncalled for. My apologies.

No worries ;)

Greets,
 Jeroen