When trying to compile an ABF application on a Red Hat Enterprise
Linux Server release 5.4,Intel(R) Xeon(R) and II 9.1.2 (int.lnx/
100)NPTL,
I get the following errors :

"Processing form 'ylxo60701p' . . .
Forcing compilation to create object file.
Compiling '218688.c' . . .
218688.c:1420: error: expected identifier or '(' before '=' token
E_AB001E Compilation failed"

I've found out that the form in question (218688.c) is missing the
global FRAME identifier here :
FRAME * = {
&_form0

};

which should be replaced with the identifier/frame name as :
FRAME * II030amylxo90701p = {
&_form0

};

So I edited the file 218688.c and removed permission so it cannot be
overwritten and so return to its previous state,compiled again and got
the following output :
"Processing form 'ylxo60701p' . . .
Forcing compilation to create object file.
E_FC0006 Can not open file "/usr/ingres/abf/psnodb/gryl00010a/
218688.c"
for output. Please check that you have specified a legal filename
and
that you have permission to create files in the desired directory.

Compiling '218688.c' . . .
Compilation succeeded."

I cannot test if it actually compiled as it says because I must go
through the same process for every form (which are A LOT), compile and
build an actual image to test that it worked.
Is this a bug? Any help?
thanks

This sounds like one of the following:

Bug 122276
(GENERIC)
E_AB001E compilation failures after a COPYAPP IN which lead to
Objects receiving a new Object ID that had more digits than
their old Object IDs. The compilation errors are a result of
incorrect code being generated. The code has "FRAME * = {"
where it should be "FRAME * identifier = {".

Bug 120290
(GENERIC)
COPYAPP IN does not update abf_source references in line with the
new object_id values assigned to the reloaded objects. This can lead
to duplicate abf_source values and compilation failures.

If you have a support contract I suggest you raise an issue and ask for
a patch with the fix to these bugs.
Otherwise you can try the latest community release which should contain
the fixes.

Regards

Alex


--
hanal04

On Mar 1, 12:14*pm, Ingres Forums <info-
ing... (AT) kettleriverconsulting (DOT) com> wrote:
Hi Alex, thanks for replying
I've checked through the Ingres service site and have seen that it had
been classified as bug 122276.
I've told the client's support to apply the service pack, so I'm
wating for news of how it goes.
In the mean time I've received another email from Ingres support with
a different approach which I will try if the service pack fails.

Kudos to Ingres service;prompt and reliable support!