11 replies to this topic

[John Lokanis]

I found a new bug in LV2010. Back in LV8.6 I reported an issue where the order of the build specifications dictated the order they would be built when doing a build all. So, If you created an EXE first, then an installer, then later added a web service and included it in the installer, the order of the build would be:

Exe > installer > web service. Thus, when you make edits to the web service code and do a build all, your changes will not be picked up unless you build all twice, since the web service would be build AFTER the installer.

The work-around was to drag the build specs around to rearrange them so the web service came before the installer that needed it. I reported this and said that a better fix would be for the project to detect this dependency and build the components in the right order.

Well, in LV2010, not only has this not been fixed, but you can no longer drag the build specs to rearrange them and work around the bug.

So, better plan your project completely before trying to build any part of it...

Edited by John Lokanis, 31 August 2010 - 09:26 PM.

[Omar Mussa]

So, better plan your project completely before trying to build any part of it...

The best workaround I can think of would be to do an automated build and programmatically invoke the build specs in the correct order. Note - this won't help the novice user, but probably most novice users aren't building multiple target files.

[crelf]

Oooooooooooo - that's nasty! I assume you've already told NI? If so, can you link to the thread or post a CAR #?



Idea: can you select the build items in the correct order (Ctrl + click) and then hit build selected? I seem to remeber that working back in the earlier 8.x days...

[John Lokanis]

Already reported. I will post the CAR when they get back to me.

I doubt the ctrl-click selection will work but I will give it a try when I can.

[jgcode]

Already reported. I will post the CAR when they get back to me.

I doubt the ctrl-click selection will work but I will give it a try when I can.

Worst case is it possible to cut and paste the XML?

[JaysonR]

I assume that the reason it's out of order might be that build specs are sorting by either name, path or type? Perhaps a workaround would be to name the build specs in such a way that when you sort them alphabetically, it will put them in the order you'd want to build them?

I see what the problem is, and I will make sure that it gets addressed ASAP. Hopefully in the meantime, you can make use of the sort order option. To do this:

right click on the build specifications node and select "Arrange By" and pick name. That should do an alphabetical sort. You can also sort by type, but then installer wouldn't come in last. You should be able to drag/drop the build specs, but it seems like you aren't able to drag/drop build specifications. I will make sure this gets fixed.

[John Lokanis]

making them alphabetical and then sorting them will arrange them correctly. Then you need to change the sort to custom and change the names back again. So that is one work around. But an annoying one at best.

[JaysonR]

making them alphabetical and then sorting them will arrange them correctly. Then you need to change the sort to custom and change the names back again. So that is one work around. But an annoying one at best.

I understand that it is annoying, and I will try my best to make sure it gets fixed. Why do you need to change the names back again? In the meantime, is it not possible to just pick names that will allow it to be sorted the way you want it all the time?

[John Lokanis]

I understand that it is annoying, and I will try my best to make sure it gets fixed. Why do you need to change the names back again? In the meantime, is it not possible to just pick names that will allow it to be sorted the way you want it all the time?

I suppose but I don't really like naming my build specs:
a myapp web service
b myapp exe
c myapp installer

Also, CAR #247090 has been created to track this issue. I hope it is not too late to get it fixed in SP1.

[JaysonR]

I have taken ownership of the CAR and will try to see that it gets fixed in SP1.

[John Lokanis]

I have taken ownership of the CAR and will try to see that it gets fixed in SP1.

Cool. As I mentioned above, the best thing would be for the 'build all' button to detect dependencies and build the specs in the proper order. That way, the order shown will not matter.

[JaysonR]

Cool. As I mentioned above, the best thing would be for the 'build all' button to detect dependencies and build the specs in the proper order. That way, the order shown will not matter.

That is definitely what we have desired, but that definitely a lot more complicated to do correctly. I think it's safe to say that won't be in SP1, but you'll get a fix for your issue