[Bf-committers] configure.in et. al. missing from CVS

[Michel Selten]

On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 16:52, Gregor M=FCck wrote:
> It's not too late to go back :-).

Well, SCons has good results so far; it has support for all platforms we
need. This is something the autoconf system lacked. So going back is not
an option. I have explained the reasons why I think we should drop
autoconf in one of the mails I pointed to. I heard no objections then.
(I'll paste the link here again):
http://www.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2003-December/004808.html

> The last issue that remained during my attempts was the final linking of =
the=20
> binary. The rest has been fairly easy to do. At least the makesdna progra=
m=20
> must always be compiled with the host as the target system, as it will be=
=20
> executed on the host lateron. This was the only other big problem I had t=
o=20
> solve.

I think I know a way of solving this with SCons. After all features are
ported over from the Makefile environment, I could have a look at that.

> The rest of the effort is to give scons scripts the magic to find all the=
=20
> components of the cross-compilation environment and find ways to call the=
=20
> host compiler although the normal gcc or cc is the crosscompiler. These a=
re=20
> problems that were formerly implicitely solved by using configure. By=20
> starting to work on the cross-compilation environment I have here right n=
ow I=20
> realized where all the complexity of autoconf/automake actually comes fro=
m.=20
> This suite attempts to solve many problems simultaneously and is actually=
=20
> fairly successful at that, too.

Yes, well, I never knew - or heard - of anybody trying to do blender
cross compilation. If I had known, this would've been taken into account
when I was still investigating SCons.

Don't loose hope yet, what you want could be possible with SCons as
well.

With regards,
	Michel