-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Yes, the website says that it can only be used with 0.14: http://www.geany.org/Support/Plugins But I did try to download the tarball and build it using the geany 0.15 sources (which of course did not work, as the website had allready told me). But maybe I missunderstood and there is an alternate way for me to download sources for the debugger plugin that will work in geany 0.15? Will the svn version work for instance (I guess I'll just try and see what happenes)? The reason I would prefer the 0.14 version of geany is that I can apt-get that one from the Ubuntu repositories, and 0.15 I can get from getdeb, which is not as convinient as getting it from the Ubuntu repos, but still better than building geany from sources :-) But if I can get all plugins to work only from the latest sources, that's what i'll do then of course.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Nick Treleaven skrev: I must be realy, realy stupid. Now I have compiled geany, geanydbg and geanyvc from svn and I can choose both geanyvc and geanydbg from the plugin-manager. I find geanyvc under the tool-menu, but I get no debugging tab, like I used to have back in geany 0.14. Has the debugger moved or have I made som kind of misstake installing? It seems strange to me that I can choose the plugin, but it doesnt show up anywhere... /Micke

On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:51:50 +0100 Micke Nordin <mickewiki(a)gmail.com> wrote: No, it's not your fault. It's difficult for users to install geany-plugins because we haven't made an official release. As Dominic said, the geanydbg 'DBG' plugin is not what you want. @Yura: Could you rename this to 'External Debugger' and geanydebug to 'GDB' to avoid confusion? Now, you might not see the geanydebug plugin because you don't have GLib 2.14 - check Help->Debug Messages, it might say: 12:53:09: INFO : Can't load plugin: /usr/local/lib/geany/geanydebug.so: undefined symbol: g_string_append_vprintf This is because it currently requires GLib 2.14. I think I can fix this, there was a patch but it didn't get applied. Regards, Nick

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Nick Treleaven skrev: Official releases (and perhaps nightly snapshots) would be a realy good idea for the plugins, and also a full list of plugins on the geany website would be good, it seems not all avalible plugins are listed there. Yupp, I've got it up and running now. Yea, perhaps a more clear name to differentiate between the plugins (along with some documentation) would be good. Is it possible to get involved with documentation of the plugins? Also a feuture request, on a side note: I found that I can use gcj to build java-code and then use the debugger-plugin to debug javaprograms from geany, wich is excellent of course. Would it be possible to add build arguments to the "java-mode" as well, beside the compile options, in the build-menu (making the java-mode more similar to the c++-mode for example? To compile and build java with Geany I now have to put this rather complex string into the compile options: gcj -c -g -O "%f" && gcj --main="%e" -o "%e" "%e".o Also having a dropdown menu where I can choose from different compilers would be good, so that I could easily switch between javac and gcj :) /Micke

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Nick Treleaven skrev: This was realy easy once I had read manual :-), thanks for pointing me there What I ment was that I'd like to have the ability to specify two (or more) compiler=/linker=/run_cmd= sections in filetypes.* and then be able to choose which ones to use in a drop down menu, or by checking a radiobutton or something. (Luxury problems, I know, not very high up on the todo-list :-) Another thing I found now is the "%e" doesen't return filename without filename extension as it does for c++-files, instead it returns filename + .class, so I have to build my executables with gcj - --main="%e" -o "%e.class" "%e.o" in order to be able to run gcj-built java-program with "./%e". Is this also me, doing something wrong? /Micke

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:41:46 +0100 Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger(a)uvena.de> wrote: I think we could remove the check and just let the java interpreter issue a 'class not found' error. Same for executables/scripts, just let the interpreter say 'unknown command'. Then the user can make the run command do anything they like ;-) Regards, Nick

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:07:27 +0000 Nick Treleaven <nick.treleaven(a)btinternet.com> wrote: Ok, I will rename them. -- Yura Siamashka <yurand2(a)gmail.com>