FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

#1
4th July 2015, 04:30 AM
 Shane Stump Posts: n/a

Howdy All!!

Has anyone ever gotten ANY version of Nexus to install into ANY ide
without spending the ENTIRE day doing it?

Not trying to be a smartass, but I can do my annual taxes including
Schedule C faster than I can get NexusDB to install.

simplest program has to have EVERY NexusDB exception edited (see errors
below from single source unit).

I have even tried the manual build the C Builder XE8 group project and
that completely causes my IDE to throw-up all kinds of EAccessErrors.

I have had this with every unicode version of Rad Studio + NexusDB.

Please tell me what I am doing wrong?

Thanks,

Shane

[bcc32 Error] nxllException.hpp(99): E2238 Multiple declaration for
'_fastcall EnxBaseException::EnxBaseException(unsigned int)'
Full parser context
Unit1.cpp(6): #include Unit1.h
Unit1.h(10): #include C:\Program Files
nxdb.hpp(31): #include C:\Program Files
nxllStreams.hpp(23): #include C:\Program Files
nxllList.hpp(22): #include C:\Program Files
nxllSync.hpp(20): #include C:\Program Files
nxllException.hpp(24): namespace Nxllexception
nxllException.hpp(49): class EnxBaseException
[bcc32 Error] nxllException.hpp(77): E2344 Earlier declaration of
'_fastcall EnxBaseException::EnxBaseException(unsigned int)'
Full parser context
Unit1.cpp(6): #include Unit1.h
Unit1.h(10): #include C:\Program Files
nxdb.hpp(31): #include C:\Program Files
nxllStreams.hpp(23): #include C:\Program Files
nxllList.hpp(22): #include C:\Program Files
nxllSync.hpp(20): #include C:\Program Files
nxllException.hpp(24): namespace Nxllexception
nxllException.hpp(49): class EnxBaseException
[bcc32 Error] nxllException.hpp(109): E2285 Could not find a match for
'Exception::Exception()'
Full parser context
Unit1.cpp(6): #include Unit1.h
Unit1.h(10): #include C:\Program Files
nxdb.hpp(31): #include C:\Program Files
nxllStreams.hpp(23): #include C:\Program Files
nxllList.hpp(22): #include C:\Program Files
nxllSync.hpp(20): #include C:\Program Files
nxllException.hpp(24): namespace Nxllexception
nxllException.hpp(49): class EnxBaseException
nxllException.hpp(149): decision to instantiate: _fastcall
EnxBaseException::EnxBaseException()
--- Resetting parser context for instantiation...
nxllException.hpp(109): parsing: _fastcall
EnxBaseException::EnxBaseException()
#2
4th July 2015, 05:34 AM
 Shane Stump Posts: n/a

Howdy All!!

Ok, after a few beers and re-evaluating the process, I remembered how I
FINALLY got it to work in XE2 (and then I NEVER UPDATED):

1) When installing into ANY version of C Builder, tell the NexusDB
installer to NOT install into the IDE.

2) Manually open the group project for NexusDB for your variant of C
Builder.

3) Modify each project as follows:

a) Add to the NexusDB source path to the the Delphi compiler options
Search Path.

b) Tell the Delphi compiler to omit ALL C++ units (i.e. the last
drop down choice).

4) Rebuild all and install the design package (i.e. the last one in the
group).

The above procedure produces correct HPP files to NexusDB units and it
outputs all the OBJ files so you don't have to figure out which LIB/BPI
missing NexusDB components!

Hope this helps!

Best,

Shane
#3
4th July 2015, 06:06 AM
 Rodrigo Gomez [NDX] Posts: n/a

Hello Shane,

I use some similar idea than yours. But, and this is important: I DON'T compile the
C++Builder packages, but the Delphi ones, with the -JPHNE (or -JL? don't remember) option
so it generates C++builder compatible files.

This generates the BPL/BPI/LIB/HPP files needed, and it's been ages since I have had any
issue with the compiled files or the headers, except for some stuff that needs to be
edited manually in the Secure headers, of duplicated constructors, but this is easily
solved. Also, an Extended const in some of the se packages, that doesn't produce an error
itself, but makes the compiler unable to create the PCH.

This works fine for XE5. For 2010 (or 2007?) there are some problems compiling the secure
packages, but even with those problems, you can use/connect to a secure server without issues.

I keep a Mercurial repository with my components so I can keep track of the files, so
recompiling or fixing the headers is usually just a matter of a diff between the newly
generated and the old ones.

I do all of this with a modified version of the batch files created by the installer, and
it takes me probably 10 minutes to install the newer versions and have them working. At
least this has been true for the last 3 or 4 updates. I haven't upgraded to 4.00.14,
though. I'm still on 4.00.13.

In any case, if somebody is interested, I can share the batch files.

Regards and happy festivities

--
Rodrigo Gómez [NDX]
México, GMT-6
#4
4th July 2015, 06:58 AM
 Shane Stump Posts: n/a

Howdy Rodrigo!

Good to hear from you!

I use to do something similar but I stayed with XE2 for SO LONG that
(i.e. 4 years) I forgot the pain!!

I know the problem isn't necessarily the component vendor!

The only reason I prefer compiling the C Builder projects is that I have
found header generation from Delphi units to be more compatible (not
sure why, but ...)!

Well, I have two more projects to redo from XE2 to XE8 and then
hopefully I can get ready for the 4th and then a 10 day ride to
Yellowstone / Glacier NPs!

All the best!

Shane
#5
4th July 2015, 09:29 AM
 Rodrigo Gomez [NDX] Posts: n/a

Hello Shane,

>
> The only reason I prefer compiling the C Builder projects is that I have found header
> generation from Delphi units to be more compatible (not sure why, but ...)!

? Not sure what you meant here. In both cases the source code is the same: the delphi
units. The only thing that differs is the project used to compile: in my case it's the
Delphi ones, NOT the C++Builder ones. I forgot the reason I started doing this like this,
but I seem to remember that doing so avoids some pain in runtime (AVs and stuff like that,
but this could easily be a thing of the past). The headers should be the same in both
cases, though. In reality it should be the same in both cases, everything, but I guess
that doing so this way sets some options that are not set in the C++Builder packages, and
that caused problems in the past.

In any case, if you have found a way, that's all that matters. <g>

>
> Well, I have two more projects to redo from XE2 to XE8 and then hopefully I can get ready
> for the 4th and then a 10 day ride to Yellowstone / Glacier NPs!

Well, that looks like a very nice trip. It's on my bucket list to see and photograph
Yellowstone some time, hopefully not far away. Enjoy!

Regards,

--
Rodrigo Gómez [NDX]
México, GMT-6
#6
4th July 2015, 09:31 AM
 Shane Stump Posts: n/a

On 7/3/2015 5:29 PM, Rodrigo Gomez [NDX] wrote:
> Hello Shane,
>
> >
>> The only reason I prefer compiling the C Builder projects is that I
>> generation from Delphi units to be more compatible (not sure why, but
>> ...)!

>
> ? Not sure what you meant here. In both cases the source code is the
> same: the delphi units. The only thing that differs is the project used
> to compile: in my case it's the Delphi ones, NOT the C++Builder ones. I
> forgot the reason I started doing this like this, but I seem to remember
> that doing so avoids some pain in runtime (AVs and stuff like that, but
> this could easily be a thing of the past). The headers should be the
> same in both cases, though. In reality it should be the same in both
> cases, everything, but I guess that doing so this way sets some options
> that are not set in the C++Builder packages, and that caused problems in
> the past.
>
> In any case, if you have found a way, that's all that matters. <g>
>
>>
>> Well, I have two more projects to redo from XE2 to XE8 and then
>> hopefully I can get ready
>> for the 4th and then a 10 day ride to Yellowstone / Glacier NPs!

Both parks are GORGEOUS!!

My bucket list would be Alaska!!! I was suppose to go there 5 years ago,
but my work schedule didn't allow it!

Best,

Shane

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts vB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Support Newsgroups     nexusdb.public.announcements     nexusdb.public.support     nexusdb.public.support.portal     nexusdb.public.support.sql     nexusdb.public.support.cbuilder     nexusdb.public.support.odbc     nexusdb.public.support.adoprovider     nexusdb.public.support.php     nexusdb.public.support.qualitysuite     nexusdb.public.remoting     nexusdb.public.support.nxScript     nexusdb.public.support.thirdparty     Binaries General Forums and chit chat     nexusdb.public.discussions     Test Forum

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post 4.06 with Rad Studio XE2???#### Shane Stump nexusdb.public.support 5 2nd September 2014 02:55 AM Visual Studio Tabs Studio Hannes Danzl[NDD] nexusdb.public.discussions 0 3rd June 2010 09:09 AM Visual Studio Arne De Herdt nexusdb.public.support 1 23rd March 2010 10:31 PM ER Studio Mark Clark nexusdb.public.support.thirdparty 2 30th October 2009 06:06 AM Query Studio Germain Cassiere nexusdb.public.discussions 3 1st June 2004 01:06 AM

All times are GMT +11. The time now is 11:28 PM.

 -- Default Style -- Blue Dream + -- Paper2 Contact Us - NexusDB Newsgroups - Top