Jump to content

VI Package Builder Error 7 - Linking Info wrong?


Recommended Posts

I'm using Package Builder to create our framework package and have encountered this error several times before. It always happens when I change the name of a class in LabVIEW.

For example, in this instance I changed a class from "ATEF_Base_Actor.lvclass" to "ATEF_v1_Base_Actor.lvclass", and subsequently the builder fails with an error:

Method Name: Linker:Read Info From File

The file at 'C:\Projects\ATE LabVIEW Framework\src\.ATE Framework\Core ATEF Actors\ATEF_v1_Base_Actor\ATEF_v1_Base_Actor.lvclass\ATEF_v1_Base_Actor.ctl' was expected to have the qualified name 'ATEF_v1_Base_Actor.lvclass:ATEF_v1_Base_Actor.ctl', but has the qualified name 'ATEF_Base_Actor.lvclass:ATEF_v1_Base_Actor.ctl'.

Somehow VI Package Builder is able to recognise the original class name from some linker info. I wonder if this is legacy data in the class itself?

A string search of the .lvclass file XML does not reveal any "ATEF_Base_Actor" results, but the error relates to the private data ".ctl". In LabVIEW itself the private data control has no legacy class name references:

I've tried Mass Compile, I've tried deleting the compiler cache, I've tried restarting LabVIEW.
In the past, the only solution has been to revert in source code control and avoid renaming classes at all, but I need this working now.

Does anyone have an idea how this is happening? Is there a bug in LabVIEW that's maintaining some stale linker data in the class somehow? I vaguely recall there's a method to purge class historical data (mutation history), do I need to try this?

Also, we standardised on LabVIEW 2017 SP1 and VI Package Manager 2017 (seems we're on v17.0.0), and we can't upgrade to new major releases.

Edited by Thoric
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update: I tried moving every class into a dud library, saving every class, then moved them all back out to where they were originally, saved every class, then tried VI Package Builder, and....


So not sure what this did but changing the ownership of classes from independent to belonging-to-a-library and then back again seemed to sort this.

Edited by Thoric
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.