John J. Boyer | 1 Dec 13:36 2002

Problem Installing Automake

Hello,

I'm installing Gnome in preparation for adding support for a tactile 
graphics printer to libgnomeprint. After downloading gnome-print from CVS, 
I tried to build it. Configure said it needed automake, so I got that. 
Whe I tried to build automake it said that it needed autoconf, so I got 
that. Autoconf built and installed successfully, as evidenced by the 
presencee of the man page. Automake also seemed to install, but when I 
tried to build gnome-print it again said that it needed automake. There is 
also no automake man page. To install automake I followed the install 
instructions for automake and tried to install it twice. What could be the 
problem? I don't yet have Gnome on my system, since Gnopernicus isn't 
really working, but I will soon install Redhat 8.0 on another partition. 
Right now I am using Redhat 7.3. 

Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

John

--

-- 
Computers to Help People, Inc.
http://www.chpi.org
825 East Johnson; Madison, WI 53703
Malcolm Tredinnick | 1 Dec 23:19 2002
Picon

Re: Problem Installing Automake

On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 06:36:30AM -0600, John J. Boyer wrote:
> I'm installing Gnome in preparation for adding support for a tactile 
> graphics printer to libgnomeprint. After downloading gnome-print from CVS, 
> I tried to build it. Configure said it needed automake, so I got that. 
> Whe I tried to build automake it said that it needed autoconf, so I got 
> that. Autoconf built and installed successfully, as evidenced by the 
> presencee of the man page. Automake also seemed to install, but when I 
> tried to build gnome-print it again said that it needed automake. There is 
> also no automake man page. To install automake I followed the install 
> instructions for automake and tried to install it twice. What could be the 
> problem? I don't yet have Gnome on my system, since Gnopernicus isn't 
> really working, but I will soon install Redhat 8.0 on another partition. 
> Right now I am using Redhat 7.3. 
> 
> Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

My first suggestion would be to wonder if you really need to build from
source. It's probably easier to just grab the rpms for automake,
autoconf and libtool and just install them.

Also, what version of automake and autoconf did you install? Looking at
the code, libgnomeprint requires automake-1.4, not automake-1.6, so if
you just grabbed the latest version you could find, it will not work.
You need to be able to run

	automake-1.4 --version

and get some useful output.

Malcolm
(Continue reading)

John J. Boyer | 2 Dec 00:41 2002

Re: Problem Installing Automake

Malcolm,

Thanks. I'm planning to install Redhat 8.0, so I think I'll just wait a 
few days and get all the correct rpm's and API's.

John

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 06:36:30AM -0600, John J. Boyer wrote:
> > I'm installing Gnome in preparation for adding support for a tactile 
> > graphics printer to libgnomeprint. After downloading gnome-print from CVS, 
> > I tried to build it. Configure said it needed automake, so I got that. 
> > Whe I tried to build automake it said that it needed autoconf, so I got 
> > that. Autoconf built and installed successfully, as evidenced by the 
> > presencee of the man page. Automake also seemed to install, but when I 
> > tried to build gnome-print it again said that it needed automake. There is 
> > also no automake man page. To install automake I followed the install 
> > instructions for automake and tried to install it twice. What could be the 
> > problem? I don't yet have Gnome on my system, since Gnopernicus isn't 
> > really working, but I will soon install Redhat 8.0 on another partition. 
> > Right now I am using Redhat 7.3. 
> > 
> > Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.
> 
> My first suggestion would be to wonder if you really need to build from
> source. It's probably easier to just grab the rpms for automake,
> autoconf and libtool and just install them.
> 
> Also, what version of automake and autoconf did you install? Looking at
(Continue reading)

Michael Meeks | 2 Dec 09:44 2002

Re: active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi

Hi Padraig,

On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 13:05, Padraig O'Briain wrote:
> The only interesting thing in the active-descendant-changed signal is the object 
> which is the new active descendant.
> 
> Do I need to call BONOBO_OBJECT_REF (spi_accessible_new()) on it and stick it 
> into the any_data field?

	No idea; Bill added the code to do this; I believe you want to do
spi_init_any_object or somesuch - you probably want to avoid leaking
this => release the object after you've handed it over I guess. I don't
think the current code does that right. 

	HTH,

		Michael.

> -- 
>  mmeeks <at> gnu.org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
Bill Haneman | 2 Dec 11:19 2002
Picon

Re: active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi

On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 08:44, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Padraig,
> 
> On Fri, 2002-11-29 at 13:05, Padraig O'Briain wrote:
> > The only interesting thing in the active-descendant-changed signal is the object 
> > which is the new active descendant.
> > 
> > Do I need to call BONOBO_OBJECT_REF (spi_accessible_new()) on it and stick it 
> > into the any_data field?
> 
> 	No idea; Bill added the code to do this; I believe you want to do
> spi_init_any_object or somesuch - you probably want to avoid leaking
> this => release the object after you've handed it over I guess. I don't
> think the current code does that right. 

Yes, and yes (current code is incorrect.) 
It's on my fixit list. :-)

- Bill

> 	HTH,
> 
> 		Michael.
> 
> > -- 
> >  mmeeks <at> gnu.org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnome-accessibility-devel mailing list
> Gnome-accessibility-devel <at> gnome.org
(Continue reading)

Bill Haneman | 2 Dec 11:29 2002
Picon

Re: Problem Installing Automake

Hi John/All:

Malcolm is right, the current GNOME-2 stack requires two versions of
automake, both automake 1.4 and automake 1.6.  The somewhat ugly
solution is to create symlinks to the binaries so that "automake-1.4"
and "automake-1.6" are valid commands.  I believe that the automake
install may do this for you but am not 100% sure anymore.

regards,

Bill
Padraig O'Briain | 5 Dec 12:14 2002
Picon

Re: active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi

I have started trying to add support for active-descendant-changed in the bridge 
and I have hit a problem.

The any_data field in Accessibility_Event is a CORBA_any and the function 
spi_init_any_object() returns a CORBA_any for a CORBA_object. I have an 
AtkObject. I can create an SpiAccessible from it but how do I get a 
CORBA_object?

Padraig

> > The only interesting thing in the active-descendant-changed signal is the 
object 
> > which is the new active descendant.
> > 
> > Do I need to call BONOBO_OBJECT_REF (spi_accessible_new()) on it and stick 
it 
> > into the any_data field?
> 
> If you did, you of course would need to unref it again after the event
> emission since at the moment listeners are not guaranteed to do the
> unref (and it would be more traffic over the wire anyway).  
> 
> You will note that at the moment the code to do this lives in
> spi_atk_signal_emit_event (and, in turn, in spi_init_any_object () which
> it calls); there's some commented-out stuff for the child-changed
> signal, and presumably we'd need to add code to handle the
> active-descendant-changed signal as well.  As Michael has pointed out
> recently, the existing code is not the correct way of doing this (see
> below), which is the main reason the implementation is commented out
> until somebody has time to do this thoughtfully and properly.
(Continue reading)

Bill Haneman | 5 Dec 13:35 2002
Picon

Re: active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi

On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 11:14, Padraig O'Briain wrote:
> I have started trying to add support for active-descendant-changed in the bridge 
> and I have hit a problem.
> 
> The any_data field in Accessibility_Event is a CORBA_any and the function 
> spi_init_any_object() returns a CORBA_any for a CORBA_object. I have an 
> AtkObject. I can create an SpiAccessible from it but how do I get a 
> CORBA_object?

Padraig:

spi_init_any_object returns null; but of course it does 'return' a
CORBA_Any in an 'inout' param, so to speak.  Since an SpiAccessible is
an instance of BonoboObject, you can use BONOBO_OBJREF () for this.
Of course the usual concerns about duplicating refs before marshalling
them via CORBA apply.

I should have you look at my current patch for cspi's (now private)
method cspi_internal_event_get_object () to make sure everything adds up
in this context.  At the moment it uses a 
borrow-ref-return sequence to ensure that the "Accessible *" (pointer to
a corba object reference) which it returns is either live or a NULL
pointer (if the object in question is dead by the time it's
demarshalled).  However this patch requires that cspi_dup_ref passes the
cspi_ev() environment variable to the bonobo_object_dup_ref() call
rather than the current NULL pointer, so I wanted to get Michael's
opinion before going further with this patch.

regards,

(Continue reading)

Bill Haneman | 5 Dec 15:41 2002
Picon

Re: active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi

based on a quick chat, I think Michael prefers the following patch:

(which adds cspi_object_take(), a method for converting a
CORBA_reference to a valid "Accessible*" if possible).

I see no attractive alternative to converting the object references in
the CORBA_Any to real refs (incurring a roundtrip) since:

* the listening client will presumably want to call API on the
Accessible after obtaining it, anyhow, thus it needs a ref();

* the listening client can't otherwise be sure that the object ref is
alive, since even within the event delivery loop there are cases where
the object might have been asynchronously delivered (for instance, the
Java bridge must queue its notifications);

* if the EventFoo_getObjectFoo methods use "borrow" instead of "take",
listeners would have to call "cspi_object_return" afterwards, which
would entail introducing new client object-handling rules.

-Bill
Attachment (cspi-object-events.diff): text/x-patch, 3449 bytes
Padraig O'Briain | 6 Dec 10:58 2002
Picon

Re: active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi

I have managed to add support to at-spi for active-descendat-changed signal 
which does not crash the application. Comments requested.

Padraig

> Subject: Re: [g-a-devel]active-descendant-changed signal and at-spi
> To: "Padraig O'Briain" <Padraig.Obriain <at> sun.com>
> Cc: michael <at> ximian.com, gnome-accessibility-devel <at> gnome.org
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> 
> On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 11:14, Padraig O'Briain wrote:
> > I have started trying to add support for active-descendant-changed in the 
bridge 
> > and I have hit a problem.
> > 
> > The any_data field in Accessibility_Event is a CORBA_any and the function 
> > spi_init_any_object() returns a CORBA_any for a CORBA_object. I have an 
> > AtkObject. I can create an SpiAccessible from it but how do I get a 
> > CORBA_object?
> 
> Padraig:
> 
> spi_init_any_object returns null; but of course it does 'return' a
> CORBA_Any in an 'inout' param, so to speak.  Since an SpiAccessible is
> an instance of BonoboObject, you can use BONOBO_OBJREF () for this.
> Of course the usual concerns about duplicating refs before marshalling
> them via CORBA apply.
> 
> I should have you look at my current patch for cspi's (now private)
> method cspi_internal_event_get_object () to make sure everything adds up
(Continue reading)


Gmane