# Cannot compile Paraview 5.4.1
**URL:** https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239
**Category:** ParaView Support
**Created:** [December 28, 2019, 9:06am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239 "2019-12-28T09:06:31Z")
**Posts on this page:** 10
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@artemiialessandrini](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/artemiialessandrini)
#### Post date: [December 28, 2019, 9:06am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/1 "2019-12-28T09:06:31Z")
Installing Paraview unsing `paraview-superbuild`, I’m facing with:
```auto
[78%] Completed 'osmesa'
[78%] Built target osmesa
Makefile:129: recipe for target 'all' failed
```
My ccmake config is:
```auto
CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/opt/paraview-5.4.1
ENABLE_ffmpeg=ON
ENABLE_fontconfig=ON
ENABLE_freetype=ON
ENABLE_matplotlib=ON
ENABLE_mpi=ON
ENABLE_numpy=ON
ENABLE_osmesa=ON
ENABLE_ospray=ON
ENABLE_png=ON
ENABLE_python=ON
ENABLE_pythonsetuptools=ON
ENABLE_scipy=ON
PYTHON_EXECUTABLE:FILEPATH=/usr/bin/python2
PYTHON_INCLUDE_DIR:PATH=/usr/include/python2.7
PYTHON_LIBRARY:FILEPATH=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpython2.7.so
```
, Since I’m following [this](https://forgeanalytics.io/blog/paraview-installation-osmesa-ubuntu/).
`sys.maxunicode>65535 ` is set to `TRUE`.
Sometimes the same error happens with **vtkm** :
```auto
[63%] Completed 'vtkm'
[63%] Built target vtkm
Makefile:129: recipe for target 'all' failed
make: *** [all] Error 2
```
I’m bad at CMake, please, give me some clue what this error could be about?
I want to use Paraview for visualize a result from _libpointmatcher_ (ICP library for 2-D/3-D mapping in Robotics)
Thank you!
---
### Author:  [@cory.quammen](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/cory.quammen)
#### Post date: [January 2, 2020, 11:06pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/2 "2020-01-02T23:06:21Z")
Are you sure you are building from the [v5.4.1 tag](https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview-superbuild/-/tags/v5.4.1) in the superbuild? Actually, that may not be helpful for figuring out what the errors you are seeing mean, but it is a good thing to check nonetheless.
Does the build complete if you run `make` a second time?
---
### Author:  [@artemiialessandrini](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/artemiialessandrini)
#### Post date: [January 3, 2020, 7:55am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/3 "2020-01-03T07:55:35Z")
HI, thanks for your response
Yes, I’m building from the [v5.4.1 tag](https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview-superbuild/-/tags/v5.4.1).
No, I’ve tried multiple times, that’s basically the error, while running `make` second time.
```auto
[63%] Completed 'vtkm'
[63%] Built target vtkm
Makefile:129: recipe for target 'all' failed
make: *** [all] Error 2
```
---
### Author:  [@artemiialessandrini](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/artemiialessandrini)
#### Post date: [January 3, 2020, 7:58am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/4 "2020-01-03T07:58:04Z")
Could it be some python conflict error?
I did comment ROS `source` lines in` ~/.bashrc` , if related.
---
### Author:  [@cory.quammen](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/cory.quammen)
#### Post date: [January 7, 2020, 1:38pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/5 "2020-01-07T13:38:39Z")
I don’t suspect a Python error. @ben.boeckel have we ever seen this?
What command are you running to execute the build? `make` should be sufficient without the `-j` option - parallel building happens at the project level. Maybe if you are including `-j` that is leading to a problem (wild guess, haven’t tried it).
---
### Author:  [@artemiialessandrini](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/artemiialessandrini)
#### Post date: [January 9, 2020, 2:01am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/6 "2020-01-09T02:01:46Z")
Strangely enough, `make` without the `-j` option was the way to go.
I’d also like to point out, due to slow internet connection, I’ve been pre-downloading required dependencies into the `CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX/downloads/` dir., where it is expected to be found by `superbuild`.
So, reason could be wrongly set permission access , although it was set to 777 **or** broken files.
Is there any way to check whether compressed files are corrupt or not?
**Anyways, installing without `-j` flag and without pre-downloading archives solved the problem.**
Thank you, @cory.quammen, for your help!
---
### Author:  [@wascott](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/wascott)
#### Post date: [January 9, 2020, 2:23am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/7 "2020-01-09T02:23:13Z")
@cory.quammen @artemiialessandrini Surprisingly, I have seen issues with a -j before, but not for a long time. When you do get a good build, you may want to also try building with Paraview 5.7. 5.4.1 was a really good, stable release, but it is a few years old at this point.
---
### Author:  [@artemiialessandrini](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/artemiialessandrini)
#### Post date: [January 9, 2020, 2:39am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/8 "2020-01-09T02:39:11Z")
Thanks for your comment, @wascott
Currently I’m using it only as a visualization tool for 2D PointClouds, which seems to be quite an easy task.
When digging deeper, I’ll definitely give it a try!
---
### Author:  [@wascott](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/wascott)
#### Post date: [January 9, 2020, 2:43am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/9 "2020-01-09T02:43:13Z")
Don’t forget that there is a really easy solution - Kitware has binaries on the [paraview.org](http://paraview.org) website. If you could use these…
---
### Author:  [@ben.boeckel](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/ben.boeckel)
#### Post date: [January 14, 2020, 3:30pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/cannot-compile-paraview-5-4-1/3239/10 "2020-01-14T15:30:54Z")
> [@artemiialessandrini](#):
>
> Strangely enough, `make` without the `-j` option was the way to go.
I imagine that there could certainly be parallel build issues in 5.4.1 with Makefiles. I believe Ninja was the vastly preferred method at the time, but the superbuild may have not supported Ninja then either. It’s hard to tell without the output of the actual failure (which in a parallel build may be far away from the `make: *** [all] Error 2` output you have above).