Thread overview | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
May 30, 2007 supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Is there any reason why there can't be a dmc/gmake target in the wx bakefiles? The official story seems to be that the dmars target is crippled because dmars make is crippled. But why bother with dmars make when there are at least three free ports of gnumake for win32 out there that I know of [1]. Is there some mystery magic that lurks within dmars' make that can't be duplicated in gnumake? [1] cygwin, MSYS, and gnuwin32 --bb |
May 30, 2007 Re: supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Bill Baxter | Hi, I suggest you buy smake Extended Utilities Package at http://www.digitalmars.com/eup.html and use smake -makefile.dms Walter is very good at fixing bugs, so we do need to use his tools. chris Bill Baxter wrote: > Is there any reason why there can't be a dmc/gmake target in the wx bakefiles? The official story seems to be that the dmars target is crippled because dmars make is crippled. But why bother with dmars make when there are at least three free ports of gnumake for win32 out there that I know of [1]. > > Is there some mystery magic that lurks within dmars' make that can't be duplicated in gnumake? > > > [1] cygwin, MSYS, and gnuwin32 > > --bb |
May 30, 2007 Re: supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to chris elliott | Yes, you're probably right. Spending $15 for something I don't really need is probably a better value proposition than spending 20 hours trying to implement something I don't really need.
But the question remains, is there anything preventing one from implementing a dmars_gmake bakefile target? It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult to make a hybrid out of the mingw bakefiles and dmars bakefiles, given familiarity with how bakefile works.
You're right -- I'm probably not going to do it, but the answer to the above question tells me something about the flexibility of the bakefile system, and that's of interest to me. And doing it could be a good way to get acquainted with bakefile's internals.
--bb
chris elliott wrote:
> Hi, I suggest you buy smake
>
> Extended Utilities Package at http://www.digitalmars.com/eup.html
>
> and use smake -makefile.dms
>
> Walter is very good at fixing bugs, so we do need to use his tools.
>
> chris
>
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Is there any reason why there can't be a dmc/gmake target in the wx bakefiles? The official story seems to be that the dmars target is crippled because dmars make is crippled. But why bother with dmars make when there are at least three free ports of gnumake for win32 out there that I know of [1].
>>
>> Is there some mystery magic that lurks within dmars' make that can't be duplicated in gnumake?
>>
>>
>> [1] cygwin, MSYS, and gnuwin32
>>
>> --bb
|
May 31, 2007 Re: supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Bill Baxter | Bill Baxter wrote:
> Yes, you're probably right. Spending $15 for something I don't really need is probably a better value proposition than spending 20 hours trying to implement something I don't really need.
>
> But the question remains, is there anything preventing one from implementing a dmars_gmake bakefile target? It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult to make a hybrid out of the mingw bakefiles and dmars bakefiles, given familiarity with how bakefile works.
>
> You're right -- I'm probably not going to do it, but the answer to the above question tells me something about the flexibility of the bakefile system, and that's of interest to me. And doing it could be a good way to get acquainted with bakefile's internals.
To answer my own question, yes, DMC w/ gnu make works fine. Took me only about an hour of work (starting from knowing basically nothing about bakefile) to create a hybrid of the bakefile defs files, and to modify the wx bkl files accordingly. The new target is called dmars_gnu.
My motivation for this is helping out the wxD project. In order to use wxD you have to build wxWidgets using dmc. It already takes too many steps to build and install wxD. Requiring one of those steps to be "download bakefile just so you can regenerate makefiles for the version of wx you want to build -- or buy the EUP for smake" is a little annoying.
--bb
|
May 31, 2007 Re: supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Bill Baxter | Bill Baxter wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Yes, you're probably right. Spending $15 for something I don't really need is probably a better value proposition than spending 20 hours trying to implement something I don't really need.
>>
>> But the question remains, is there anything preventing one from implementing a dmars_gmake bakefile target? It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult to make a hybrid out of the mingw bakefiles and dmars bakefiles, given familiarity with how bakefile works.
>>
>> You're right -- I'm probably not going to do it, but the answer to the above question tells me something about the flexibility of the bakefile system, and that's of interest to me. And doing it could be a good way to get acquainted with bakefile's internals.
>
> To answer my own question, yes, DMC w/ gnu make works fine. Took me only about an hour of work (starting from knowing basically nothing about bakefile) to create a hybrid of the bakefile defs files, and to modify the wx bkl files accordingly. The new target is called dmars_gnu.
>
> My motivation for this is helping out the wxD project. In order to use wxD you have to build wxWidgets using dmc. It already takes too many steps to build and install wxD. Requiring one of those steps to be "download bakefile just so you can regenerate makefiles for the version of wx you want to build -- or buy the EUP for smake" is a little annoying.
Oh foo. Nevermind. It doesn't work. The libraries build and go to the right places but none of the samples will link properly.
--bb
|
June 01, 2007 Re: supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Bill Baxter | I still use the IDDE... and not the bakefiles... wxWidgets 2.8.x compiles fine in the IDDE (if you want the files... ) samples build just file with the IDDE... Jan Bill Baxter wrote: > Bill Baxter wrote: >> Bill Baxter wrote: >>> Yes, you're probably right. Spending $15 for something I don't really need is probably a better value proposition than spending 20 hours trying to implement something I don't really need. >>> >>> But the question remains, is there anything preventing one from implementing a dmars_gmake bakefile target? It doesn't seem like it should be that difficult to make a hybrid out of the mingw bakefiles and dmars bakefiles, given familiarity with how bakefile works. >>> >>> You're right -- I'm probably not going to do it, but the answer to the above question tells me something about the flexibility of the bakefile system, and that's of interest to me. And doing it could be a good way to get acquainted with bakefile's internals. >> >> To answer my own question, yes, DMC w/ gnu make works fine. Took me only about an hour of work (starting from knowing basically nothing about bakefile) to create a hybrid of the bakefile defs files, and to modify the wx bkl files accordingly. The new target is called dmars_gnu. >> >> My motivation for this is helping out the wxD project. In order to use wxD you have to build wxWidgets using dmc. It already takes too many steps to build and install wxD. Requiring one of those steps to be "download bakefile just so you can regenerate makefiles for the version of wx you want to build -- or buy the EUP for smake" is a little annoying. > > Oh foo. Nevermind. It doesn't work. The libraries build and go to the right places but none of the samples will link properly. > > --bb -- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper Smartsoft, LLC 88 Petersburg Road Petersburg, NJ 08270 U.S.A. www.smartsoft.us Phone : 609-628-4260 FAX : 609-628-1267 Y! : janknepper But as for me and my household, we shall use Mozilla... www.mozilla.org Get legal - Get OpenOffice.org www.openoffice.org |
October 26, 2008 Re: supporting dmc/gnumake | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jan Knepper | Hi, Jan Knepper wrote: > I still use the IDDE... and not the bakefiles... > wxWidgets 2.8.x compiles fine in the IDDE (if you want the files... ) > samples build just file with the IDDE... > Is x in 2.8.x apply to 2.8.8 or 2.8.9? If so, I want your files :) ps-1. Recently, I post a message about getting "internal error: eh 759" for building 2.8.8 via makefile.dms. ps-2. I tried to build 2.9.0 snapshot too. After some conversation at wxwindows list and compiling trial, Vadim Zeitlin (one of core developers of wx) wrote following: HD> > HD> There is no file named shldisp.h in dm. HD> > HD> > AFAICS all the rest is due to missing Platform SDK files/definitions. You HD> > can either make a patch adding everything needed to the __DMC__ section of HD> > include/wx/msw/missing.h or contribute the missing definitions to DMC HD> > itself (preferred). We definitely don't want to work around each of them HD> > individually in the wx sources, sorry. HD> HD> I understand. But, losting a free/good compiler option due to old PSDK HD> makes me sorry.. It's unfortunate but I don't see any other solution except using a newer PSDK. It shouldn't be that difficult... Again, if you prefer to reproduce all the missing stuff in __DMC__ section of missing.h -- why not. But IMO this would be a waste of [your] time. > Jan > > -- Regards, Hakki Dogusan |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation