Search Results

Search found 2237 results on 90 pages for 'msp430 gcc'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 13/90 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

  • gcc optimization? bug? and its practial implication to project

    - by kumar_m_kiran
    Hi All, My questions are divided into three parts Question 1 Consider the below code, #include <iostream> using namespace std; int main( int argc, char *argv[]) { const int v = 50; int i = 0X7FFFFFFF; cout<<(i + v)<<endl; if ( i + v < i ) { cout<<"Number is negative"<<endl; } else { cout<<"Number is positive"<<endl; } return 0; } No specific compiler optimisation options are used or the O's flag is used. It is basic compilation command g++ -o test main.cpp is used to form the executable. The seemingly very simple code, has odd behaviour in SUSE 64 bit OS, gcc version 4.1.2. The expected output is "Number is negative", instead only in SUSE 64 bit OS, the output would be "Number is positive". After some amount of analysis and doing a 'disass' of the code, I find that the compiler optimises in the below format - Since i is same on both sides of comparison, it cannot be changed in the same expression, remove 'i' from the equation. Now, the comparison leads to if ( v < 0 ), where v is a constant positive, So during compilation itself, the else part cout function address is added to the register. No cmp/jmp instructions can be found. I see that the behaviour is only in gcc 4.1.2 SUSE 10. When tried in AIX 5.1/5.3 and HP IA64, the result is as expected. Is the above optimisation valid? Or, is using the overflow mechanism for int not a valid use case? Question 2 Now when I change the conditional statement from if (i + v < i) to if ( (i + v) < i ) even then, the behaviour is same, this atleast I would personally disagree, since additional braces are provided, I expect the compiler to create a temporary built-in type variable and them compare, thus nullify the optimisation. Question 3 Suppose I have a huge code base, an I migrate my compiler version, such bug/optimisation can cause havoc in my system behaviour. Ofcourse from business perspective, it is very ineffective to test all lines of code again just because of compiler upgradation. I think for all practical purpose, these kinds of error are very difficult to catch (during upgradation) and invariably will be leaked to production site. Can anyone suggest any possible way to ensure to ensure that these kind of bug/optimization does not have any impact on my existing system/code base? PS : When the const for v is removed from the code, then optimization is not done by the compiler. I believe, it is perfectly fine to use overflow mechanism to find if the variable is from MAX - 50 value (in my case).

    Read the article

  • C++: Why does gcc prefer non-const over const when accessing operator[]?

    - by JonasW
    This question might be more appropriately asked regarding C++ in general, but as I am using gcc on linux that's the context. Consider the following program: #include <iostream> #include <map> #include <string> using namespace std; template <typename TKey, typename TValue> class Dictionary{ public: map<TKey, TValue> internal; TValue & operator[](TKey const & key) { cout << "operator[] with key " << key << " called " << endl; return internal[key]; } TValue const & operator[](TKey const & key) const { cout << "operator[] const with key " << key << " called " << endl; return internal.at(key); } }; int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { Dictionary<string, string> dict; dict["1"] = "one"; cout << "first one: " << dict["1"] << endl; return 0; } When executing the program, the output is: operator[] with key 1 called operator[] with key 1 called first one: one What I would like is to have the compiler choose the operator[]const method instead in the second call. The reason is that without having used dict["1"] before, the call to operator[] causes the internal map to create the data that does not exist, even if the only thing I wanted was to do some debugging output, which of course is a fatal application error. The behaviour I am looking for would be something like the C# index operator which has a get and a set operation and where you could throw an exception if the getter tries to access something that doesn't exist: class MyDictionary<TKey, TVal> { private Dictionary<TKey, TVal> dict = new Dictionary<TKey, TVal>(); public TVal this[TKey idx] { get { if(!dict.ContainsKey(idx)) throw KeyNotFoundException("..."); return dict[idx]; } set { dict[idx] = value; } } } Thus, I wonder why the gcc prefers the non-const call over the const call when non-const access is not required.

    Read the article

  • How to resolve include file names conflicts in GCC?

    - by actual
    I have two header files named string.h in different libraries, they are conflicted with each other and even conflicted with standard C include file of the same name. There is no need to use any string.h except standard one, but I need to include libraries headers paths in GCC search path. Currently I use something like -I /usr/local/include/lib1 -I /usr/local/include/lib2, but that way I can not include standard C string.h. What is the right way to resolve such conflicts?

    Read the article

  • C printf not working on ubuntu 13.10 terminal

    - by Blaze Tama
    First, im new in ubuntu so please bear with me. I need to create a C based program for a course in my university. I was using opensuse and its konsole when i was in the university's lab. So basically i need to install opensuse on my system or using a vmware. But i feel lazy to do that, so i tried to run it on my ubuntu instead of opensuse. However, no C code seems working on ubuntu's terminal. The compiling is success, but its not running, or at least the printf is not running. This is my code, a very very simple one : #include<stdio.h> #include<unistd.h> #include<stdlib.h> int main() { printf("test"); return 0; } When i compile it with gcc test.c -o test everything work fine and i get an executeable file. Then i try to run it by ./test, but the printf is not printed. No error or warning was shown. Am i missing something? Note : my gcc is the new one, it should has no problem. Thanks for your help :D

    Read the article

  • Install newer version of GCC in Knoppix

    - by Z boson
    I have Knoppix 7.30 installed on a USB with a persistent file. It comes with GCC 4.7.2. I would like to install GCC 4.9.x or 4.8.x. Being that Knopppix is based on Debian I would normally do something like apt-get upgrade But as far as I understand it's not recommended to do this with Knoppix. Warning: apt-get upgrade is a BAD IDEA. It will, quite probably, render your KNOPPIX remaster unbootable, or broken in some way. A far safer method is to only upgrade packages as necessary. I can say from experience that that is the cse. So how should I go about installing GCC 4.9? Another option would be to "remaster" knoppix to use GCC 4.9 by default rather than install it with a persistent file. I would be happy with either solution.

    Read the article

  • Problem with GCC calling static templates functions in templated parent class.

    - by Adisak
    I have some code that compiles and runs on MSVC++ but will not compile on GCC. I have made a test snippet that follows. My goal was to move the static method from BFSMask to BFSMaskSized. Can someone explain what is going on with the errors (esp. the weird 'operator<' error)? Thank you. In the case of both #defines are 0, then the code compiles on GCC. #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 0 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 0 I get errors if I change either #define to 1. Here are the errors I see. #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 0 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 1 Test.cpp: In static member function 'static typename Snapper::BFSMask<T>::T_Parent::T_SINT Snapper::BFSMask<T>::Create_NEZ(TCMP)': Test.cpp(492): error: 'CreateMaskFromHighBitSized' was not declared in this scope #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 1 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 0 Test.cpp: In static member function 'static typename Snapper::BFSMask<T>::T_Parent::T_SINT Snapper::BFSMask<T>::Create_NEZ(TCMP) [with TCMP = int, T = int]': Test.cpp(500): instantiated from 'TVAL Snapper::BFWrappedInc(TVAL, TVAL, TVAL) [with TVAL = int]' Test.cpp(508): instantiated from here Test.cpp(490): error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'unsigned int' to binary 'operator<' #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 1 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 1 Test.cpp: In static member function 'static typename Snapper::BFSMask<T>::T_Parent::T_SINT Snapper::BFSMask<T>::Create_NEZ(TCMP) [with TCMP = int, T = int]': Test.cpp(500): instantiated from 'TVAL Snapper::BFWrappedInc(TVAL, TVAL, TVAL) [with TVAL = int]' Test.cpp(508): instantiated from here Test.cpp(490): error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'unsigned int' to binary 'operator<' Here is the code namespace Snapper { #define DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC 0 #define FUNCTION_IN_PARENT 0 // MASK TYPES // NEZ - Not Equal to Zero #define BFSMASK_NEZ(A) ( ( A ) | ( 0 - A ) ) #define BFSELECT_MASK(MASK,VTRUE,VFALSE) ( ((MASK)&(VTRUE)) | ((~(MASK))&(VFALSE)) ) template<typename TVAL> TVAL BFSelect_MASK(TVAL MASK,TVAL VTRUE,TVAL VFALSE) { return(BFSELECT_MASK(MASK,VTRUE,VFALSE)); } //----------------------------------------------------------------------------- // Branch Free Helpers template<int BYTESIZE> struct BFSMaskBase {}; template<> struct BFSMaskBase<2> { typedef UINT16 T_UINT; typedef SINT16 T_SINT; }; template<> struct BFSMaskBase<4> { typedef UINT32 T_UINT; typedef SINT32 T_SINT; }; template<int BYTESIZE> struct BFSMaskSized : public BFSMaskBase<BYTESIZE> { static const int SizeBytes = BYTESIZE; static const int SizeBits = SizeBytes*8; static const int MaskShift = SizeBits-1; typedef typename BFSMaskBase<BYTESIZE>::T_UINT T_UINT; typedef typename BFSMaskBase<BYTESIZE>::T_SINT T_SINT; #if FUNCTION_IN_PARENT template<int N> static T_SINT CreateMaskFromHighBitSized(typename BFSMaskBase<N>::T_SINT inmask); #endif }; template<typename T> struct BFSMask : public BFSMaskSized<sizeof(T)> { // BFSMask = -1 (all bits set) typedef BFSMask<T> T_This; // "Import" the Parent Class typedef BFSMaskSized<sizeof(T)> T_Parent; typedef typename T_Parent::T_SINT T_SINT; #if FUNCTION_IN_PARENT typedef T_Parent T_MaskGen; #else typedef T_This T_MaskGen; template<int N> static T_SINT CreateMaskFromHighBitSized(typename BFSMaskSized<N>::T_SINT inmask); #endif template<typename TCMP> static T_SINT Create_NEZ(TCMP A) { //ReDefineType(const typename BFSMask<TCMP>::T_SINT,SA,A); //const typename BFSMask<TCMP>::T_SINT cmpmask = BFSMASK_NEZ(SA); const typename BFSMask<TCMP>::T_SINT cmpmask = BFSMASK_NEZ(A); #if DOESNT_COMPILE_WITH_GCC return(T_MaskGen::CreateMaskFromHighBitSized<sizeof(TCMP)>(cmpmask)); #else return(CreateMaskFromHighBitSized<sizeof(TCMP)>(cmpmask)); #endif } }; template<typename TVAL> TVAL BFWrappedInc(TVAL x,TVAL minval,TVAL maxval) { const TVAL diff = maxval-x; const TVAL mask = BFSMask<TVAL>::Create_NEZ(diff); const TVAL incx = x + 1; return(BFSelect_MASK(mask,incx,minval)); } SINT32 currentsnap = 0; SINT32 SetSnapshot() { currentsnap=BFWrappedInc<SINT32>(currentsnap,0,20); return(currentsnap); } }

    Read the article

  • Adding icon to gcc executable and opening in terminal.

    - by sfactor
    I made a program to connect to a device via Bluetooth and send the data to the web using pure C in gcc. I won't be able to implement any GUI portion in the code right now but I need to deploy it to test users for testing. I want to have the executable with an icon so that a user can click on the executable and the program starts in the terminal. How do I add an icon to the executable and start the program in the terminal? Sorry I failed to mention before that its in Ubuntu Linux

    Read the article

  • how to raise warning if return value is disregarded - gcc or static code check?

    - by Drakosha
    I'd like to see all the places in my code (C++) which disregard return value of a function. How can I do it - with gcc or static code analysis tool? Bad code example: int f(int z) { return z + (z*2) + z/3 + z*z + 23; } int main() { int i = 7; f(i); ///// <<----- here I disregard the return value return 1; } Update: it should work even if the function and its use are in different files free static check tool

    Read the article

  • How to get rid of `deprecated conversion from string constant to ‘char*’` warnings in GCC?

    - by Josh Matthews
    So I'm working on an exceedingly large codebase, and recently upgraded to gcc 4.3, which now triggers this warning: warning: deprecated conversion from string constant to ‘char*’ Obviously, the correct way to fix this is to find every declaration like char *s = "constant string"; or function call like void foo(char *s); foo("constant string"); and make them const char pointers. However, that would mean touching 564 files, minimum, which is not a task I wish to perform at this point in time. The problem right now is that I'm running with -werror, so I need some way to stifle these warnings. How can I do that?

    Read the article

  • Count function calls by name or signature. Gcc, C++

    - by MajesticRa
    I have some c++ written package. Linux, gcc. I can modify compilation process (change Makefile, flags, etc.), but can not change C++ source code. One runs the package with different parameters, it does a job and exits. How to count: 1) Number of calls of function with specific name? 2) Number of calls of functions with specific signature? 3) Number of calls of functions where one of the parameters is of specific type i.e. std::string (type is specified by signature)? 4) and extra Number of calls of functions of STL objects, i.e. std::string copy constructor? (I mean count a number of calls during the run. ) I thought to do it with GDB, but I found it very tough to do (1) and have not found how to do (2)-(4) at all. All acceptable answers I will write here for humanity.

    Read the article

  • Why does gcc warn about incompatible struct assignment with a `self = [super initDesignatedInit];' c

    - by gavinbeatty
    I have the following base/derived class setup in Objective-C: @interface ASCIICodeBase : NSObject { @protected char code_[4]; } - (Base *)initWithASCIICode:(const char *)code; @end @implementation ASCIICodeBase - (ASCIICodeBase *)initWithCode:(const char *)code len:(size_t)len { if (len == 0 || len > 3) { return nil; } if (self = [super init]) { memset(code_, 0, 4); strncpy(code_, code, 3); } return self; } @end @interface CountryCode : ASCIICodeBase - (CountryCode *)initWithCode:(const char *)code; @end @implementation CountryCode - (CountryCode *)initWithCode:(const char *)code { size_t len = strlen(code); if (len != 2) { return nil; } self = [super initWithCode:code len:len]; // here return self; } @end On the line marked "here", I get the following gcc warning: warning: incompatible Objective-C types assigning 'struct ASCIICodeBase *', expected 'struct CurrencyCode *' Is there something wrong with this code or should I have the ASCIICodeBase return id? Or maybe use a cast on the "here" line?

    Read the article

  • Cross compilation of udns for power pc

    - by pragya
    I have libraries of x86 architecture that I want to cross compile for power pc. I have already cross compiled different libraries for power pc by setting environment variables for powerpc and using appropriate options with ./configure. Now, I want to cross compile libudns for powerpc. In ./configure --help I am not getting those appropriate options to cross compile. For libudns, I set environment variables for powerpc and ran ./configure but it throws following error: configure: fatal: $CC (powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc) is not a working compiler

    Read the article

  • makeMKV setup error

    - by PitaJ
    When I run sudo bash configure (./configure doesn't work), I get this: checking whether we are cross compiling... configure: error: in /media/pitaj/Shared/Documents/makeMKV/makemkv-oss': configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs. If you meant to cross compile, use --host'. See `config.log' for more details In console.log, it says that gcc -V isn't valid I'm following this tutorial: http://www.makemkv.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=224

    Read the article

  • Why does GCC need extra declarations in templates when VS does not?

    - by Kyle
    template<typename T> class Base { protected: Base() {} T& get() { return t; } T t; }; template<typename T> class Derived : public Base<T> { public: Base<T>::get; // Line A Base<T>::t; // Line B void foo() { t = 4; get(); } }; int main() { return 0; } If I comment out lines A and B, this code compiles fine under Visual Studio 2008. Yet when I compile under GCC 4.1 with lines A and B commented, I get these errors: In member function ‘void TemplateDerived::foo()’: error: ‘t’ was not declared in this scope error: there are no arguments to ‘get’ that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of ‘get’ must be available Why would one compiler require lines A and B while the other doesn't? Is there a way to simplify this? In other words, if derived classes use 20 things from the base class, I have to put 20 lines of declarations for every class deriving from Base! Is there a way around this that doesn't require so many declarations?

    Read the article

  • How to write a buffer-overflow exploit in GCC,windows XP,x86?

    - by Mask
    void function(int a, int b, int c) { char buffer1[5]; char buffer2[10]; int *ret; ret = buffer1 + 12; (*ret) += 8;//why is it 8?? } void main() { int x; x = 0; function(1,2,3); x = 1; printf("%d\n",x); } The above demo is from here: http://insecure.org/stf/smashstack.html But it's not working here: D:\test>gcc -Wall -Wextra hw.cpp && a.exe hw.cpp: In function `void function(int, int, int)': hw.cpp:6: warning: unused variable 'buffer2' hw.cpp: At global scope: hw.cpp:4: warning: unused parameter 'a' hw.cpp:4: warning: unused parameter 'b' hw.cpp:4: warning: unused parameter 'c' 1 And I don't understand why it's 8 though the author thinks: A little math tells us the distance is 8 bytes. My gdb dump as called: Dump of assembler code for function main: 0x004012ee <main+0>: push %ebp 0x004012ef <main+1>: mov %esp,%ebp 0x004012f1 <main+3>: sub $0x18,%esp 0x004012f4 <main+6>: and $0xfffffff0,%esp 0x004012f7 <main+9>: mov $0x0,%eax 0x004012fc <main+14>: add $0xf,%eax 0x004012ff <main+17>: add $0xf,%eax 0x00401302 <main+20>: shr $0x4,%eax 0x00401305 <main+23>: shl $0x4,%eax 0x00401308 <main+26>: mov %eax,0xfffffff8(%ebp) 0x0040130b <main+29>: mov 0xfffffff8(%ebp),%eax 0x0040130e <main+32>: call 0x401b00 <_alloca> 0x00401313 <main+37>: call 0x4017b0 <__main> 0x00401318 <main+42>: movl $0x0,0xfffffffc(%ebp) 0x0040131f <main+49>: movl $0x3,0x8(%esp) 0x00401327 <main+57>: movl $0x2,0x4(%esp) 0x0040132f <main+65>: movl $0x1,(%esp) 0x00401336 <main+72>: call 0x4012d0 <function> 0x0040133b <main+77>: movl $0x1,0xfffffffc(%ebp) 0x00401342 <main+84>: mov 0xfffffffc(%ebp),%eax 0x00401345 <main+87>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp) 0x00401349 <main+91>: movl $0x403000,(%esp) 0x00401350 <main+98>: call 0x401b60 <printf> 0x00401355 <main+103>: leave 0x00401356 <main+104>: ret 0x00401357 <main+105>: nop 0x00401358 <main+106>: add %al,(%eax) 0x0040135a <main+108>: add %al,(%eax) 0x0040135c <main+110>: add %al,(%eax) 0x0040135e <main+112>: add %al,(%eax) End of assembler dump. Dump of assembler code for function function: 0x004012d0 <function+0>: push %ebp 0x004012d1 <function+1>: mov %esp,%ebp 0x004012d3 <function+3>: sub $0x38,%esp 0x004012d6 <function+6>: lea 0xffffffe8(%ebp),%eax 0x004012d9 <function+9>: add $0xc,%eax 0x004012dc <function+12>: mov %eax,0xffffffd4(%ebp) 0x004012df <function+15>: mov 0xffffffd4(%ebp),%edx 0x004012e2 <function+18>: mov 0xffffffd4(%ebp),%eax 0x004012e5 <function+21>: movzbl (%eax),%eax 0x004012e8 <function+24>: add $0x5,%al 0x004012ea <function+26>: mov %al,(%edx) 0x004012ec <function+28>: leave 0x004012ed <function+29>: ret In my case the distance should be - = 5,right?But it seems not working.. Why function needs 56 bytes for local variables?( sub $0x38,%esp )

    Read the article

  • GCC, -O2, and bitfields - is this a bug or a feature?

    - by Rooke
    Today I discovered alarming behavior when experimenting with bit fields. For the sake of discussion and simplicity, here's an example program: #include <stdio.h> struct Node { int a:16 __attribute__ ((packed)); int b:16 __attribute__ ((packed)); unsigned int c:27 __attribute__ ((packed)); unsigned int d:3 __attribute__ ((packed)); unsigned int e:2 __attribute__ ((packed)); }; int main (int argc, char *argv[]) { Node n; n.a = 12345; n.b = -23456; n.c = 0x7ffffff; n.d = 0x7; n.e = 0x3; printf("3-bit field cast to int: %d\n",(int)n.d); n.d++; printf("3-bit field cast to int: %d\n",(int)n.d); } The program is purposely causing the 3-bit bit-field to overflow. Here's the (correct) output when compiled using "g++ -O0": 3-bit field cast to int: 7 3-bit field cast to int: 0 Here's the output when compiled using "g++ -O2" (and -O3): 3-bit field cast to int: 7 3-bit field cast to int: 8 Checking the assembly of the latter example, I found this: movl $7, %esi movl $.LC1, %edi xorl %eax, %eax call printf movl $8, %esi movl $.LC1, %edi xorl %eax, %eax call printf xorl %eax, %eax addq $8, %rsp The optimizations have just inserted "8", assuming 7+1=8 when in fact the number overflows and is zero. Fortunately the code I care about doesn't overflow as far as I know, but this situation scares me - is this a known bug, a feature, or is this expected behavior? When can I expect gcc to be right about this? Edit (re: signed/unsigned) : It's being treated as unsigned because it's declared as unsigned. Declaring it as int you get the output (with O0): 3-bit field cast to int: -1 3-bit field cast to int: 0 An even funnier thing happens with -O2 in this case: 3-bit field cast to int: 7 3-bit field cast to int: 8 I admit that attribute is a fishy thing to use; in this case it's a difference in optimization settings I'm concerned about.

    Read the article

  • Unix makefile errors " 'ake: Fatal error: Don't know how to make (c file here)"

    - by gwenger
    I've written the below makefile: hw2p1: hw2p1_main.o hw2p1_getit.o hw2p1_parseit.o hw2p1_moveit.o hw2p1_showit.o gcc hw2p1_main.o hw2p1_getit.o hw2p1_parseit.o hw2p1_moveit.o hw2p1_showit.o hw2p1_main.o: hw2p1_main.c gcc -c hw2p1_main.c hw2p1_getit.o: hw2p1_getit.c gcc -c hw2p1_getit.c hw2p1_parseit.o: hw2p1_parseit.c gcc -c hw2p1_parseit.c hw2p1_moveit.o: hw2p1_moveit.c gcc -c hw2p1_moveit.c hw2p1_showit.o: hw2p1_showit.c gcc -c hw2p1_showit.c The first time I tried to call make, I got the error: "make: Fatal error: unexpected end of line seen" I deleted the blank lines between targets and called make again, but this time I got " 'ake: Fatal error: Don't know how to make hw2p1_main.c" I've compiled all of these files separately and then linked them so I know that the errors are a result of an incorrect makefile and not a result of errors in my c files. This is the first makefile that I've ever written so I might just be doing it completely incorrectly. Either way, any suggestions on how to get rid of these errors?

    Read the article

  • Installing missing package that provides Xm/Xm.h

    - by Nicholas Kinar
    I'm compiling a software package that requires a header file. The header file is missing from my Ubuntu 11.10 (64-bit) installation. During the compilation using make, gcc and gfortran, I receive the following error message. XMstr.c:7:19: fatal error: Xm/Xm.h: No such file or directory Googling for an answer leads me to believe that a MESA library needs to be installed on my system, but I can't find an exact match for the package name. What might be the name of the package that I need to install? Does the package have the same name on more recent Ubuntu distros?

    Read the article

  • How do I compile lbflow 1.1?

    - by Ali.A
    After using "sh ./configure" command, I encountered another error during lbflow package installation (a scientific one). The sequence of operations is here with error: ./configure --disable-gts sudo make [sudo] password for alireza: make all-recursive make[1]: Entering directory `/home/alireza/lbflow-1.1' Making all in src make[2]: Entering directory `/home/alireza/lbflow-1.1/src' source='lbflow.cpp' object='lbflow-lbflow.o' libtool=no \ DEPDIR=.deps depmode=none /bin/bash ../depcomp \ g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -c -o lbflow-lbflow.o `test -f 'lbflow.cpp' || echo './'`lbflow.cpp **../depcomp: line 432: exec: g++: not found** **make[2]: *** [lbflow-lbflow.o] Error 127 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/alireza/lbflow-1.1/src' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/alireza/lbflow-1.1' make: *** [all] Error 2** Do you have any idea to troubleshoot this problem? (And please notice that i have installed both g++ and gcc. it says g++: not found, but i have installed g++ from Ubuntu Software Center!)

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >