Mellroth Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 I'm trying to build a VIPM package that should be added to Addons under a new category named WireFlow. If I add both a control palette as well as a function palette one of them (it depends on when the vipb file was saved) does not get placed under the WireFlow category. Instead they are placed under palettes named CTLs or VIs, with a default LabVIEW icon. The files, however, seems to get installed in the right place (Addons\WireFlow), but one of the palettes show up wrong. /J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Aivaliotis Posted May 23, 2012 Report Share Posted May 23, 2012 Are you running VIPM 2012? This may be a bug which was fixed in the latest version. If not, could you please attach your source code zipped with the vipb file? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mellroth Posted May 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2012 Are you running VIPM 2012? This may be a bug which was fixed in the latest version. If not, could you please attach your source code zipped with the vipb file? I have tried on VIPM 2011 and 2012, both with the same result. The attached zip file contains a simple VI and Ctrl together with a vipb file that builds a package that displays the problem. I have checked the dir.mnu file VIPM generates, and it only contains either Control or Function palette data. My guess is that VIPM generates one dir.mnu file for controls and one for functions,. This is OK as long as the controls and functions palettes are located at different paths, but when they are at the same path (in my case the Addons directory) I guess the last generated dir.mnu file is used instead of writing both function and control data into the same mnu file. I tested to write both Control and function palette data to the mnu-file, and this makes everything show up OK. /J Edit: I also included a Post-Install-Action-VI that can be used as a workaround. VIPM bug report.zip VIPM-Post-Install Custom Action.vi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashish Posted May 25, 2012 Report Share Posted May 25, 2012 Just wanted to let you know that I was able to recreate the behavior described by you and currently it is under investigation. I will get back to you early next week with the analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashish Posted May 29, 2012 Report Share Posted May 29, 2012 We have identified this as a bug and created Case 13445. The case is under consideration. Thank you for providing enough information about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Aivaliotis Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Just want to give an update to say that this issue is fixed in VIPM 2012.0.1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.