[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Compile Problems with OpenOffice



On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:

> /home/palic/OpenOffice/oo_633_src/tools/bootstrp/command.cxx: In
> function `static class ByteString CCommand::Search(ByteString = thePath,
> ByteString = "csh")':
> /home/palic/OpenOffice/oo_633_src/tools/bootstrp/command.cxx:550: no
> match for `ByteString & == const char[4]'
> /usr/include/stlport/stl/_cwchar.h:119: candidates are: bool
> _STL::operator ==(const _STL::__stl_mbstate_t &, const
> _STL::__stl_mbstate_t &)
> /usr/include/stlport/stl/char_traits.h:76:                 bool
> _STL::operator ==(const _STL::fpos<_STL::__stl_mbstate_t> &, const
> _STL::fpos<_STL::__stl_mbstate_t> &)
> /home/palic/OpenOffice/oo_633_src/tools/bootstrp/command.cxx:553: no
> match for `ByteString & != const char[1]'
> /usr/include/stlport/stl/_cwchar.h:123: candidates are: bool
> _STL::operator !=(const _STL::__stl_mbstate_t &, const
> _STL::__stl_mbstate_t &)
> /usr/include/stlport/stl/char_traits.h:78:                 bool
> _STL::operator !=(const _STL::fpos<_STL::__stl_mbstate_t> &, const
> _STL::fpos<_STL::__stl_mbstate_t> &)
> /home/palic/OpenOffice/oo_633_src/tools/bootstrp/command.cxx:611: no
> match for `ByteString & == const char[1]'
> /usr/include/stlport/stl/_cwchar.h:119: candidates are: bool
> _STL::operator ==(const _STL::__stl_mbstate_t &, const
> _STL::__stl_mbstate_t &)
> /usr/include/stlport/stl/char_traits.h:76:                 bool
> _STL::operator ==(const _STL::fpos<_STL::__stl_mbstate_t> &, const
> _STL::fpos<_STL::__stl_mbstate_t> &)
>
>
> Does anyone has a hint, where I have to look for?

Maybe you need the latest libstlport library (in case OO is using it).
*t

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Tomas Pospisek
	     SourcePole   -  Linux & Open Source Solutions
	     http://sourcepole.ch
	     Elestastrasse 18, 7310 Bad Ragaz, Switzerland
	     Tel: +41 (81) 330 77 11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------



Reply to: