This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.
Steve, >Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 20:33:26 -1000 (HST) >From: Steven Howell <address@hidden> >Organization: University of Hawaii >To: Russ Rew <address@hidden>, >To: Steve Emmerson <address@hidden> >Subject: Re: 970130: Netcdf under NeXTstep >Keywords: 199701310220.TAA15014 In the above message you wrote: > As Ray suggested, I got netcdf-3.3a from your ftp site. So far, it > looks much better. I have had some minor problems, and since this is > a beta version, pehaps you'd like some feedback. Absolutely! We appreciate feedback -- it improves the product. > 1) When extracting the files from the archive > (zcat netcdf-3.3a.tar.Z | tar xvf -), there was an odd problem > with directories that I've never seen before. Each directory was > regarded as a zero length executable file rather than a directory. > The files that should have gone into the directories couldn't be > untarred; I got errors like > > tar: can't create netcdf-3.3a/src/macros.make.def: Not a directory > > So, did a tar tf - to get all of the directory names, made those > directories by hand, and reran tar, which then complained > > tar: can't create netcdf-3.3a/src: Is a directory > > but at least I got all of the files. Could my version of tar be > incompatible with yours? Seems unlikely, but I don't know what > else would cause that. Odd problem. I've never encountered it before (but I've never worked on a Next before either). We try to make the tar(1) files as portable as possible, so I'm a little suspicious of your tar(1) but, we'll have to look into it. > 2) INSTALL mentions a README file, which isn't in the distribution. Oops! We don't have one either. We'll have to create it. > 3) I set the following environment variables: > > setenv CC cc > setenv CFLAGS '-g -Wall -D_POSIX_SOURCE' > setenv FC '' > > configure ran without complaints, but 'make all' failed > immediately. Next doesn't supply the dirname utility. Grr. I > installed the gnu version, which compiles without problem. Make > then choked in the src/fortran directory with the error message > > Make: Don't know how to make nextstep.m4. Stop. This should be fixed in the next release. > For some reason, the macro FC in macros.make wasn't set to the > empty string, If you change the configuration parameters, then you have to `make distclean' before running the configure script again. > which had been the purpose of that last setenv > statement (yes, the other setenv statements worked). Instead, > macros.make had the line > > FC = : > > which I changed to > > FC = > > Make all then worked fine, skipping the fortran interface. The -Wall > switch stimulated lots of warning messages. Most had to do with implicit > declarations, variables defined but not used, and useless keywords in > header files. > > 4) 'make test' didn't fare so well, though I'm still optimistic. > libsrc/t_nc and nctest/nctest went fine. nc_test/nc_test, however > had 4 errors, all involving 'uchar', whatever that is: > > *** Testing nc_get_var1_uchar ... > FAILURE at line 135 of test_get.c: expected: 128, got: 127 > 263 good comparisons. > ### 1 FAILURES TESTING nc_get_var1_uchar! ### > > *** Testing nc_get_vara_uchar ... > FAILURE at line 854 of test_get.c: value read not that expected > 263 good comparisons. > ### 1 FAILURES TESTING nc_get_vara_uchar! ### > > *** Testing nc_get_vars_uchar ... > FAILURE at line 1992 of test_get.c: value read not that expected > 263 good comparisons. > ### 1 FAILURES TESTING nc_get_vars_uchar! ### > > *** Testing nc_get_varm_uchar ... > FAILURE at line 3372 of test_get.c: value read not that expected > 263 good comparisons. > ### 1 FAILURES TESTING nc_get_varm_uchar! ### > Total number of failures: 4 > *** Exit 1 > Stop. > *** Exit 1 > Stop. > *** Exit 1 > Stop. Thanks. We'll look into this. > I cd'd to ncdump and ran 'make test' which was successful. > > 'make test' in ncgen wasn't so successful. The first test ( -b ) worked, > but the second did not: > > ./ncgen -c -o ctest0.nc test0.cdl > test0.c > cc -o ctest0 -I../libsrc -DNDEBUG= -O -Wall -D_POSIX_SOURCE test0.c > ../libsrc/libnetcdf.a > ./ctest0 # tests `-c' option, creates ctest0.nc > ../ncdump/ncdump -n test1 ctest0.nc > ctest1.cdl > 52c52 > < 7, 10000000000, 1.5e+30 ; > --- > > 7, 10000000000, 1.49999999999999e+30 ; > *** Exit 1 > Stop. > > If that's just roundoff error, then I'm not too worried about it. > > Are the errors in nc_test a big problem? If it's a test of the > version 3 interface, perhaps it implies that I won't have problems > with GMT, which was written with 2.3 in mind. nc_test tests the version 3 interface. nctest (no underscore) tests the version 2 interface. You *might* be OK. > Good news! GMT compiled just fine, and I tested one of the routines that > depends on a netCDF database. It worked just fine. So, aside from the > failures in nc_test, everything looks good. > > Thanks for your help! You're welcome. -------- Steve Emmerson <address@hidden>