[Bf-committers] autoconf?
Bradley Berthold
bf-committers@blender.org
Mon, 21 Oct 2002 12:32:57 -0700 (PDT)
--0-1377025725-1035228777=:74237
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Well, here's my take on it so far -
I'm not very intimately familiar with autoconf. I did some searches on the net today to see what it really does. Looks like it's just a script that generates makefiles from a template.
Anyway, I *personally* dont like the idea of having WIndows users being forced to use Cygwin in any fasion. It's a Humongous download. It would be very very good to have VC projects also.
On some other open source projects, such as libJpeg, I believe, they have a makefile for NMAKE called Makefile.vc. This makefile is generated by autonconf from a Nmake template (that's my assumption). This approach could work; however, it would not "create" VC dsp and dsw files for you. dsp files are makefiles in essence - the GUI creates the makefile from the project settings and runs nmake for you. Personally I prefer having that GUI, for nice things such as intellisense, syntax checking, etc. ....
Right now I don't know of a good way to coagulate these two together (other than the makefile.vc), without having someone edit VC projects as well, for example, if a completely new item is added. This would require more research on my part yet, perhaps someone else here maybe knows of a method already as well? I will continue searching.
Right now I am concentrating my efforts on organizing the VC++ project file settings correctly. For windows it may be good to allow the developer not to have to download all the 3rd party libraries required. Hence I would like to put in a folder which contains pre-build versions for windows, with headers too ( openssl, fmod, libjpeg, zlib, etc). Setting up header paths and such should be done in the project's settings to allow for vanilla building ( the developer could build on a plain VC installation, without being required to modify VC editor options, etc.). Does this sound like an ok thing to do? Also, for some libraries perhaps their licensing would not support this action - like fmod for example. Please give me some feedback !
-nt20
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
--0-1377025725-1035228777=:74237
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<P>Well, here's my take on it so far -</P>
<P>I'm not very intimately familiar with autoconf. I did some searches on the net today to see what it really does. Looks like it's just a script that generates makefiles from a template.</P>
<P>Anyway, I *personally* dont like the idea of having WIndows users being forced to use Cygwin in any fasion. It's a Humongous download. It would be very very good to have VC projects also.</P>
<P>On some other open source projects, such as libJpeg, I believe, they have a makefile for NMAKE called Makefile.vc. This makefile is generated by autonconf from a Nmake template (that's my assumption). This approach could work; however, it would not "create" VC dsp and dsw files for you. dsp files are makefiles in essence - the GUI creates the makefile from the project settings and runs nmake for you. Personally I prefer having that GUI, for nice things such as intellisense, syntax checking, etc. ....</P>
<P>Right now I don't know of a good way to coagulate these two together (other than the makefile.vc), without having someone edit VC projects as well, for example, if a completely new item is added. This would require more research on my part yet, perhaps someone else here maybe knows of a method already as well? I will continue searching.</P>
<P>Right now I am concentrating my efforts on organizing the VC++ project file settings correctly. For windows it may be good to allow the developer not to have to download all the 3rd party libraries required. Hence I would like to put in a folder which contains pre-build versions for windows, with headers too ( openssl, fmod, libjpeg, zlib, etc). Setting up header paths and such should be done in the project's settings to allow for vanilla building ( the developer could build on a plain VC installation, without being required to modify VC editor options, etc.). Does this sound like an ok thing to do? Also, for some libraries perhaps their licensing would not support this action - like fmod for example. Please give me some feedback ! </P>
<P>-nt20</P>
<P> </P><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ ">Y! Web Hosting</a> - Let the expert host your web site
--0-1377025725-1035228777=:74237--