barney

Hi Tim! Also the sub vi's from an excluded file? regards barns

Thanks for the reply... I run into another issue. I tried to get it run with source distribution and llb's. When I do that and exclude a class a library or a vi, every subvi and control used by the members are also excluded?! Is this a wanted behaviour? Means. Every subvi and control used in the excluded lvclass, lvlib or vi is also excluded from the distribution?! Regards Barns

Mmm, but this only works for one hierarchy level or? attached with version 2012.... I don't get conflicts at all.... ?? In this constellation?? LibALL_2011.zip LibALL_2012.zip LibALL_2013.zip

Hi, When I download and install the exe from the Click here to get your free Base license for BLT link, I'm asked for a licence file. Where do I get the license for the free basic version to have a look on it? I don't get out from my enterprise network...

Hi Tim_S, thanks for the reply. I'm running a project started in 2006 when GOOP was young. I used the endevo implementation and deployed every thing with source distribution and loaded dynamically. I now started to change to the Labview objects and first tests improved speed. Objects are much more handy to deal with lot of functionality; I like it. If you want to load objects dynamically you have to build them somehow, or capsulate them? Otherwise you will have a lot of vi's on your disk which I want to avoid. But when deploying objects you get name conflicts when building because of the inheritance mechanism. (Same name for the dynamically overriding vi). Also frameworks where developed using PPL's. https://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-19176#/; https://decibel.ni.com/content/groups/large-labview-application-development/blog/2011/05/08/an-approach-to-managing-plugins-in-a-labview-application But what if you want to use PPL "plugin's" in PPL "plugin's"? e.g. PPL Intrument drivers used by PPL plugins? Or your PPL plugin's depend on one math library [Main(LibA(LibC),LibB(LibC))] provided in a PPL? And then build it in an exe. I'm not a "real" programmer so if I'm wrong please help me out... I'll try to provide the zip for 2011. Best regards Barns

Hi there, I had to use packed libraries (PPL). No problems... But then I also had to deploy my code with PPL's. As already known there are several issues noted http://labviewjournal.com/2011/10/packed-project-libraries-part-2/?relatedposts_exclude=99 out there. I wondered if there is a solution to this with 2013 but as far as I know : nope. If somebody knows a good simple way please let me know. While experimenting I found a way how to do it. I attached some code and am curious if it works for others too.... The setting was like this. I had a LibC and it is used in LibA. In LibB I had to use LibA and LibC. In the Main.vi I use LibA and LibB. It's a usual use case I hope . A library LibC used by two plugin's. Since Labview includes the lvlibp's in each distribution you run into a name conflict when using and deploying the lvlibp's and the exe in the end. The solution would be to exclude them during build. But this wasn't possible. It seemed ! Naive as I am I had a look on the build specs in the project files, and found an node called "Bld_excludedDirectory" but only for source distribution. I copied this entry from there to the spec for the PPL and ..... it worked fine! This came out at last. <Property Name="Bld_excludedDirectory[0]" Type="Path">../Shelf</Property> <Property Name="Bld_excludedDirectory[0].pathType" Type="Str">relativeToCommon</Property> <Property Name="Bld_excludedDirectoryCount" Type="Int">1</Property> So when the project is load into memory the build classes keep this info and proceed with it as with source distribution. (One draw back is, that when resaving the whole project or edit the build spec in the editor it is gone again ! ) It's now in principle also possible to have a custom exclude path for the build. then I had doubts: Am I doing something illegal? I hope no..... I hope I could help someone with this Info. Best Regards Barns LibALL.zip

Hello there, I'm new to lava.org , and I love it. I'm working with OpenG since a while in development environment. At the moment I have to compile the code and use an installer. So I have to consider licenses? As I understand I have to do two things. I have to provide the EULA during Install. (Is it difficult with the NI Installer?) In the "About" of the exe I have to mention that it uses OpenG. As in http://jkisoft.com/vipm/docs/2010/index.html?turl=copyrightinformation.htm Is it enough? For this purpose I've started to write a tool that reads out all the names from the licence text. I'm encountering 2 problems. Some Copyright statements do not us a "," after the Year. Some do not use a brace around the email adresse. It shows that there is not only a need of a standard but also that it should be used. I could make a list of these vi's and post it here if wanted? Best Regards Barney