Thanks. It works perfect.
Another question is:
Is it possible to run .msl seqscript from bash cmd?
Maybe it's easier then
1 odbedit -c 'set "/sequencer/load filename" filename.msl'
2 odbedit -c 'set "/sequencer/load new file" TRUE'
3 odbedit -c 'set "/sequencer/start script" TRUE'

What is the best way to have a button starting sequencer
from  /script (or /alias )?

Alexey.

> > I tried different ways to pass parameters to bash script, but there are seems to 
> > be empty, what could be the problem?
> 
> Indeed there was a bug in the sequencer with parameter passing to scripts. I fixed it
> and committed the changes to the develop branch.
> 
> Stefan

hi,

there are several problems with current cmake build files in midas:
- not all systems have cuda libs in /usr/local/cuda
- not all cmake version like when redefining vars
  (i.e. redefining ROOT_CXX_FLAGS)
- c++ standard not matching the one used to build ROOT
- ROOTSYS is not needed to find ROOT (it is enough to have root in PATH)

I have posted pull request 'https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/pull-requests/17'
which tries to fix some of the problems.
Tests and comments are welcome.

currently to link Midas to project one has to do several steps in cmake script:
- do `find_package`
- get Midas location from MIDASSYS, or from MIDAS_LIBRARY_DIRS
- set MIDAS_INCLUDE_DIRS, MIDAS_LIBRARY_DIRS and MIDAS_LIBRARIES to your target
- add sources from Midas for mfe, drivers, etc.

in general cmake already can to all of this automatically, and the only lines you would need are:
- do `find_package(Midas ... PATHS ~/midas_install_location)`
- and do `target_link_libraries(... midas::mfe)`
  (and all include dirs, libs, and deps are propagated automatically)

see PR https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/pull-requests/48
- nothing should break with current setups
- if you want to try new `midas::` targets, try to link e.g. `midas::mfed` to your frontend

> > > > currently to link Midas to project one has to do several steps ...
> > > this information is incorrect. please read https://daq00.triumf.ca/elog-midas/Midas/2258
> > 
> > I admit that i did not see your post about targets import
> > via `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)`
> > before implementing changes to cmake scripts.
> >
> > But in this respect the way you propose to do it via `include` should still work.
> >
> 
> I proposed nothing, you did the proposing. I spent many hours trying to understand cmake (mission 
> impossible!) and many more hours to implement the previously existing package scheme based
> on the cmake "EXPORT" function.
I agree that cmake is difficult, especially when it comes to creating cmake scripts for library
that should work for other people (as opposed to just using other libraries).
But that is why we should try to follow recommended way of using it.

> 
> > Note however that `include(...)` way is very unusual as one have to know exactly
> > where `...-targets.cmake` is located and standard way in cmake is via `find_package`
> > (similar to how e.g. ROOT, Geant4, etc. are found and linked).
> 
> Very difficult to cut-and-paste "include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)".
> 
> You cannot simplify-out $ENV{MIDASSYS} because computer cannot read your mind, which of the 10 copies
> of midas you want to use from which user account on which day.
One can use `find_package(Midas PATH $ENV{MIDASSYS})` to set specific location of Midas
(this is mentioned in https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/pull-requests/48)
and without `PATH` argument the default system/user locations are searched.

> 
> Argument about "very unusual" I would buy, I am not a cmake expert and I do not know which package
> finding method is in favour today.
> 
> >
> > Though i again admit that maybe the namespace change was a bit too much as it may
> > have broken previous users of `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)`
> > 
> 
> I believe it did break at least one experiment, after updating MIDAS to latest version,
> the analyzer would not build.
This unfortunately was not easy to avoid in this case, as both midas and manalyzer depend on each other:
midas should compile when manalyzer is enabled (as submodule)
and manalyzer should compile with midas as separate lib.
So in this case i would expect both midas and manalyzer be updated at same time to their matching versions.

> 
> Speaking of which, did you implement your new scheme for the manalyzer so that it works
> in standalone mode (without MIDAS)?
The only change on manalyzer i did was to use `find_package(Midas ...)` and `midas::midas` target
(see https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/manalyzer/commits/b219a916).
If there is interest to use same scheme in manalyzer as in Midas i can implement it.

> 
> If you did not, now we have two schemes, your new scheme just for MIDAS and my old scheme
> for manalyzer *and* MIDAS. xkcd 927.
> 
> > 
> > - shortcomings of what was before is usage of non-standard `include(...)`
> >
> 
> You should have started by posting a message spelling it out: Konstantin implemented
> a scheme that uses the cmake "export" function to find midas, mfe and manalyzer,
> it is very nice and works ok, but it is non-standard/obsoleted/obscure/frowned-upon/
> unpopular/I-do-not-like-it/I-did-not-invent-it, and I propose implementing a new scheme
> based on find_package().
As i mentioned i did not see you original post about usage of `include`
and otherwise i may have referenced it and though more about compatibility issues.

> 
> >
> > - one shortcoming i see for new implementation is usage `midas::` namespace
> >   (mentioned above) that may have broken some setups
> > 
> 
> If you think that your changes will break other people code, you should explicitely
> say this in a message to this forum and hopefully provide instruction on fixing it,
> i.e. in your makefile, please replace "midas" with "midas::midas".
In the original message to this thread i posted reference to PR
(https://bitbucket.org/tmidas/midas/pull-requests/48)
where it shows how to use `find_package` with this change.
As i did not expect the direct use of `include()` form
and assumed that manual linking was used (via specifying include/lib paths/names)
some scenarios where code for people broke were missed (not taken into account) by me.

> 
> > 
> > - `find_package` is standard and recommended way of finding packages
> >
> 
> Do you have a reference for this? When I look at cmake documentation, I do not see
> any specific recommendation on creating packages and finding them. I do see
> other people's code for finding packages and often spend hours fighting
> them because said methods are designed to work only on the developer's laptop.
see https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.27/guide/importing-exporting/index.html:
- about use of `find_package` see https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/guide/using-dependencies/index.html#guide:Using%20Dependencies%20Guide
- about double colon namespace for target see https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.27/guide/importing-exporting/index.html
  where it is mentioned "This convention of double-colons gives CMake a hint that the name is an IMPORTED target when it is used by downstream projects".

> 
> P.S. Did anybody ask Ben to update the MidasWiki documentation with the new find_package() information?
> 
> K.O.

> > currently to link Midas to project one has to do several steps ...
> 
> this information is incorrect. please read https://daq00.triumf.ca/elog-midas/Midas/2258
> 
> a very simple way to use link MIDAS using midas-targets.cmake has been implemented a long time ago.

I admit that i did not see your post about targets import
via `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)`
before implementing changes to cmake scripts.
But in this respect the way you propose to do it via `include` should still work.
Note however that `include(...)` way is very unusual as one have to know exactly
where `...-targets.cmake` is located and standard way in cmake is via `find_package`
(similar to how e.g. ROOT, Geant4, etc. are found and linked).

The things that changed (and are incompatible with what was before)
is the naming of targets (in `midas-targets.cmake` with `midas::` namespace,
which is standard practice in cmake to distinguish cmake targets from bare library names
(e.g. when you do `link_libraries(midas)` it may be interpreted as linking with `-lmidas`
or if target is defined it does machinery to link actual cmake target; the namespace way
makes it unambiguous).
Though i again admit that maybe the namespace change was a bit too much as it may
have broken previous users of `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)`

> 
> before proposing a new way of doing things, it would be nice to hear about shortcomings
> of the existing stuff.

- shortcomings of what was before is usage of non-standard `include(...)`
- one shortcoming i see for new implementation is usage `midas::` namespace
  (mentioned above) that may have broken some setups

> A simple "Konstantin's way sucks" or "this is not the cmake way!"
> would have been sufficient.

- `find_package` is standard and recommended way of finding packages
    - note that `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/midas-targets.cmake)` should still work
      (but with usage of `midas::midas` instead of simply `midas`)
    - in the end `find_package` works by locating and loading `MidasConfig.cmake`,
      and it now actually does `include("${CMAKE_CURRENT_LIST_DIR}/../../midas-targets.cmake")`,
      so in this respect `find_package` is the same as `include(...)`,
      but it also preserves old behavior of exporting cmake vars for includes/libs
      such that prev uses are unaffected,
      and does a bit more checking such that it can be used for both in- and out-of-tree builds
    
- in addition `find_package` allows to handle components,
  e.g. now it is possible to do
  `find_package(Midas COMPONENTS manalyzer)`
  instead of also doing `include($ENV{MIDASSYS}/lib/manalyzer-targets.cmake)`

> 
> K.O.

Alex

Hello,

I am using a CAEN v1720 to digitise signal coming from 5 PMTs and I need to extend the read-
out window to 1ms.

Given the sampling frequency of 250 MHz, each event would consist of about 4.78 MB

Accordingly to the documentation I found in:

https://midas.triumf.ca/MidasWiki/index.php/Event_Buffer

 - I modified the value of ODB /Experiment/MAX_EVENT_SIZE to 8 MB (I overestimated it in case 
I will readout all 8 channels of the v1720)
 - I modified the ODB key /Experiment/Buffer Sizes/SYSTEM to 512 MB (which allow to contain 
about 100 events in the buffer)

The max_event_size in the frontend source code is set to 32 MB while the event_buffer size is 
200 times the max_event_size. So I did not modify those values.

When I start a new run, the MIDAS crash and the ODB gets corrupted:

$ odbedit 
[ODBEdit,ERROR] [odb.c:1134:db_open_database,ERROR] Different database format: Shared 
memory is 262148000, program is 3
[ODBEdit,ERROR] [midas.c:2157:cm_connect_experiment1,ERROR] cannot open database
Unexpected error #326

Do you have any idea of what might be the problem?

The same thing happen if I reduce the buffer size to 128 MB.

The computer running MIDAS has 2 Quad CPU @ 2.83GHz and 4 GB RAM.

Thank you in advance for any help!
Alberto

When i compile the experiment example of 1.9.5 the problem happened:

adccalib.c: In function `INT adc_calib_init()':
adccalib.c:114: `H1_BOOK' undeclared (first use this function)
adccalib.c:114: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each
   function it appears in.)
make: *** [adccalib.o] Error 1

my ROOT is 4.01 and Zlib is 1.2.2