in reply to Re: NMAKE : fatal error U1077
in thread NMAKE : fatal error U1077

I am just using the standard Makefile that came with the 5.8.8 source. It looks like it uses xcopy to install all of the files. I have heard of xcopy having memory problems, but I figured with any luck it was just something I had set wrong in the Makefile. Here are the last few lines of output before the crash... 
        xcopy /f /r /i /d bin\*.bat c:\perl\5.8.8\bin\*.*
0 File(s) copied
        ..\perl.exe -I..\lib ..\installhtml --podroot=.. --htmldir=./h
+tml  --pod
path=pod:lib:ext:utils --htmlroot="file://c|\perl\5.8.8\html"  --libpo
+d=perlfunc
:perlguts:perlvar:perlrun:perlop --recurse
        xcopy /f /r /i /e /d html\*.* c:\perl\5.8.8\html\*.*
File not found - *.*
0 File(s) copied
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\xcopy.EXE' : return co
+de '0x4'
Stop.

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: NMAKE : fatal error U1077
by syphilis (Archbishop) on Sep 18, 2008 at 02:42 UTC
    It's not obvious to me just where the error occurs. Seems odd that both of those xcopy commands don't actually copy any files. Are there really no *.bat files in the bin folder, and no files at all in the html folder ?

    Actually, if there were no *.bat files in the bin folder then I would expect to see a "File not found - *.bat" message. The absence of that message would indicate that at least one .bat file exists ... yet 0 files get copied. Do you get the same responses if you run those 2 xcopy commands manually (from the appropriate directory of course) ?

    Is the return code '0x4' an xcopy return code (as BrowserUK suggested) or is it an nmake return code ?

    Cheers,
    Rob
[reply]

      I can't make sense of this either. Using two empty directories as a test ground: 

      C:\test\junk>dir /w a b
 Volume in drive C has no label.
 Volume Serial Number is BCCA-B4CC

 Directory of C:\test\junk\a

[.]  [..]
               0 File(s)              0 bytes

 Directory of C:\test\junk\b

[.]  [..]
               0 File(s)              0 bytes
               2 Dir(s)  15,859,965,952 bytes free

      [download]

      and a simple makefile: 

      C:\test\junk>type makefile
all:
    xcopy /f /r /i /e /d a\*.* b\*.*

      [download]

      You can see that xcopy doesn't consider it an error to copy no files with the specified set of arguments, and nmake reports no error: 

      C:\test\junk>nmake all

Microsoft (R) Program Maintenance Utility Version 7.00.9466
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

        xcopy /f /r /i /e /d a\*.* b\*.*
0 File(s) copied

      [download]

      You can reproduce the OP error message by (1 of several ways) adding an unknown switch to the xcopy command: 

      C:\test\junk>nmake all

Microsoft (R) Program Maintenance Utility Version 7.00.9466
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

        xcopy /f /r /i /e /d /b a\*.* b\*.*
Invalid switch - /b
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: 'xcopy' : return code '0x4'
Stop.

      [download]

      But if that were the problem here, a) we'd see the bad command; b) see the error message identifying it.

      But neither of the commands the OP has posted have syntax errors, and regardless of whether there is some other error that is causing there to be no files, the xcopy commands posted are correctly formatted and do not consider the absence of files to copy an error.

      I think we have a case of the OP showing us what he thinks we need to see, and missing.

      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
        I think we have a case of the OP showing us what he thinks we need to see, and missing.

        Makes sense.
        yellowman, I think the best thing for you to do would be to put the entire 'nmake install' output on your public scratchpad so that we can see *all* of it.

        Cheers,
        Rob
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom