[Bf-committers] CVS, Make & MSVC
Ryan C. Stallings (beergeek)
Tue, 22 Oct 2002 08:21:00 -0400
Hello all. I am about to get on a plane so I don't have time to investigate
it, but TrollTech (the people who make QT) have a tool called qmake
It apparently generates Unix Make files, VC Nmake files, VC Project files and
Borland Makefiles. This look promising. Does anybody have any experience
using this tool?
On Tuesday 22 October 2002 05:18 am, Ton Roosendaal wrote:
> Great! Activity at the bf-committers list!
> To summarize what has been discussed:
> - we definitely want to support MSVC project files!
> - we're not the first open source project out there with this problem,
> there *has* to be a little tool to turn Makefiles into project files?
> But that would still give troubles, because committing changes in CVS by
> windows developers then still should be Makefile compatible...
> - An alternative is:
> Is it possible to 'mark CVS dirty' or so, meaning that when someone
> commits a change in projectfiles or makefiles, he also sends a (well
> documented!) message to CVS marking it "MAKE_NEEDS_UPDATE" or
> "MSVC_NEEDS_UPDATE". Someone else then can fix it, and mark CVS clean
> This requires a discipline; the Unix guys never commit into a
> "MAKE_NEEDS_UPDATE" CVS, but agree to fix it first. The Windows guys
> never commit into a "MSVC_NEEDS_UPDATE" CVS, but fix that first as well.
> Also: a strict rule is that you never commit BEFORE having updated to
> the latest CVS status, and compiled & tested that version.
> This way we can also comminicate about the status to non-committing
> people who want the latest CVS update.
> - lib directory: we will offer all GPL and LPGL and Blender libs
> compiled for all platforms. According to me only the FMOD audio library
> has to be downloaded externally.
> - autoconf: I have no opinion about that. Maintaining makefiles was
> never my competence. :)
> - CVS backup: we are moving to a new server this week. It only has a
> single disk now, but another will be added soon. That will be the
> permanent mirror. With the new provider I'll also make a deal for a
> regular tape backup... I keep you informed about that.
> A few points that have not been discussed yet:
> 1. The general directory structure. Does this need to be changed?
> 2. Is there still a lot of NAN (define, env. variable) stuff that should
> be renamed?
> 3. Is there a need for a different 'develop' and 'release' version of
> Blender? I can remember a discussion that Blender should compile with
> dynamic libs for developers, and with static libs for release.
> 4. We need a very clear howto doc for new developers doing a first
> checkout. 5. We need a disciplined set of CVS commit rules... :-)
> Laurence Bourn wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >>It is nice to see that the build structure we used at NaN is
> >>coming back again.
> >>I think the solution with Makefiles and M$VC project files
> >>was a bit cumbersome
> >>at times but the best of both worlds. Also, it worked for us
> >>at NaN for over a
> >>year. Some projects even have project files for other
> >>development environments,
> >>like Apple's Project Builder.
> > It would be very nice to have project files for this project. Say what
> > you like but MSVC is an excellent development environment. The biggest
> > problem at NaN was with synchronization of Makefiles and projectfiles.
> > This will become a bigger problem here mainly because not everyone has
> > access to a windows box with MSVC or a linux type box.
> > There are 2 solutions for now . Either keep them seperate and it's up
> > to MSVCers to maintain the projectfile structure, and unix bods to manage
> > the makefile structure. This in general will probably lead to massive
> > amounts
> > of frustration.
> > I dont think it's a solution to bypass MSVC in favour of cygwin. Although
> > I don't know if its the best compiler around anymore for windows? However
> > it would
> > be acceptable to keep the project structure seperate from the build
> > structure under
> > MSVC. In this way it might be possible to use the makefile or template to
> > generate
> > the windows build structure. MSVCers should be responsible for
> > maintaining the
> > project structure.
> > For now Id suggest just getting the thing compiling happily under all
> > platforms. Although
> > we should try and maintain the old build structure whilst doing this. At
> > the same time we
> > should investigate how to get the makefiles or templates working under
> > MSVC. Someone must
> > have done this before right?
> >>>>Right now I am concentrating my efforts on organizing the
> >>VC++ project
> >>>>file settings correctly.
> > I have the intern libraries (save python) building nicely under MSVC if
> > you are interested.
> > If you would like this then please lobby the gods on my behalf for CVS
> > write access.
> > Cheers,
> > Laurence.(LoZaR)
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-committers mailing list
> > Bffirstname.lastname@example.org
> > http://www.soze.com/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers