[Bug 52686] Make project fails with "config.status: error: invalid argument: Makefile"ROUND

[Christophe Theron]

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
     
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52686     




------- Additional Comments From asj2 at wanadoo.fr  2003-01-09 06:38 -------
Subject: Re:  Make project fails with "config.status: error: invalid argument: Makefile"ROUND

I think there is a misunderstanding.

I perfectly understand that when I add or remove files from the project it 
re-generates the makefile and whatever it needs to regenerate.

I'm not troubled by that.

The core of the bug description is that I can't compile a freshly generated, 
extremely simple project, and that it fails with the error message I have 
quoted.

Please read my bug report carefully. I have tried to be clear and to add a lot 
of information. I have even added a workaround...

What you are referring to is not the problem at all.

I generate a very simple project, click on "Build", and Kdevelop outputs an 
error message. I can't compile my project.

I think this bug report should not be classified as RESOLVED. What is 
resolved?

As for my (somewhat harsh) comment about the way Kdevelop is tested, I still 
think that the Kdevelop team deserves it.

I'm not here to be negative, but what you need in order to do that basic 
testing that apparently has not been done is not $$$, it's just a few people 
ready to do a few tests, and more strict beta testing rules.

I have written a PalmOS chess application. In term of complexity it's not as 
hairy as Kdevelop, but it is still the integral port of a very complex PC 
chess program. I can tell you it's not easy to manage this project. Also, I 
only have one handheld model, so it is clear I cannot test my app on all the 
handheld configurations that you can find out there.

So I have found approx. 15 volunteers that do beta testing for me. That does 
not cost me a single $.

The only rule I strictly apply: I offer the product for public download only 
when 2 weeks have passed without a severe bug report.

I really can't see how a bug as obvious as the one I have reported to you 
could have survived such a simple beta test procedure.

That's why Kdevelop 2.1.4 really looks to me like an untested version...

I hope you will get the spirit of my report. I don't want to sound bitter and 
negative. I would really like to see Linux get a wider audience (it deserves 
it) and Kdevelop be even better.

But I think you can understand that I'm a little bit upset when I encounter my 
first serious bug just 1 minute after installing Kdevelop...

OK, now I hope that you will consider my bug report more carefully.

If you want me to test something specific, I can do it. I can help if you tell 
me what to test.

Thank you for your attention, and I hope that Kdevelop will be the best IDE in 
the world!


	Christophe Theron
	http://www.chesstiger.com




On Tuesday 07 January 2003 11:05, you wrote:
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You reported the bug, or are watching the reporter.
>
> http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52686
> caleb at aei-tech.com changed:
>
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>- Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |RESOLVED
>          Resolution|                            |INVALID
>
>
>
> ------- Additional Comments From caleb at aei-tech.com  2003-01-07 16:05
> ------- What you're describing isn't a bug.  When you add or delete files
> from the project it adds/deletes them from "Makefile.am".  In order to
> regenerate Makefiles, you must rerun automake and configure.  config.status
> is a by product of configure that keeps your most recent configuration so
> you can run it fast.  But this changes upon adding or removing files from
> the project.
>
> If this is troubling, I recommend upgrading to Gideon (KDevelop 3.0).  It's
> still in Alpha, but it's rather stable.  It will provide you better
> Automake support.
>
> And yes, we do test our apps.  We don't have any $ to rigorously test them
> on various platforms, but we do the best we can.