Can't find unit PropEdits used by SynPropertyEditObjectList
lazarus / 1-Linux

----------------------------------------------------------------------
techpro · 2009-11-17 19:22

I'm trying to build Lazarus from a source tarball on Linux. I have
installed FPC 2.2.4. I am running the build with root privileges. The
LCL builds OK. When I try a build all I get the above error, which I
also get if I just try to build SynEdit.

I have checked and the unit exists in /usr/share/lazarus/ideintf but
it is not being compiled. I tried putting this path in Project,
Compiler Options, Unit Paths but I think this is for the default
project "project 1" not for Lazarus itself - it didn't help.

I would be grateful for any help as I am stuck on this.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
techpro · 2009-11-17 19:36

Okay forget all that.

On a stroke of inspiration I opened a console window and typed "make"
...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin_fr · 2009-11-17 21:51

Since you first tried without "make", you must have had a lazarus
executable to build your new lazarus?

If this was an older Lazarus (0.9.26 / with 0.9.26.2 it would probably
have been ok, / with 0.9.28 it should have been ok), you would have
seen this error.

The reason is that SynEdit was extended, and needed packages, that
Lazarus used to build only after SynEdit.
You should see in your old lazarus in the "config build laz" menu,
that synedit is the 2nd entry (advanced tab).
In newer Lazaruses SynEdit is further down.

So now, that you have a newer Lazarus, you should be able to build
Lazarus from within Lazarus.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
techpro · 2009-11-17 22:28

OK, that makes sense. I had used Lazarus to build newer versions of
Lazarus before. It's the only way to do it for me - packages are too
much hassle and always complain about unsatisfied dependencies that I
have no clue how to fix.

Actually the old version this time was 0.9.27, which you seem to be
suggesting should have been OK. But no matter, I have a working
version of 0.9.29 now (I couldn't find simple tarball of the source
code for the official release 0.9.28, only rpms and debs.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin_fr · 2009-11-17 23:45

0.9.27 depends on it.s date.

0.9.27 changed daily to cover all versions from 0.9.26 to 0,9,28
(including 0.9.26.2)...

an odd number at the 3rd pos identifies a wroking version, that is not
fixed to a specific point