On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Landry Breuil <lan...@rhaalovely.net> wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:13:46PM +0200, Auclair Vincent wrote:
>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Landry Breuil <lan...@rhaalovely.net> wrote:
>> > do-configure:
>> > �...@true
>> > oh my.. CONFIGURE_STYLE is here for something, set it to an empty value
>> > and it will just work :)
>> > - COMMENT shouldn't start by a capital article, remove it
>> > - why installing the static lib ? is it needed by the binary ?
>> > - the DISTNAME/DISTFILES dance is a bit wrong, NAME is useless here as
>> > used only once. Instead, we usually set DISTNAME to the name of the
>> > zip/tarball (minus EXTRACT_SUFX) and set the real PKGNAME by hand (ie
>> > codeworkers-${V}.
>>
>> Thought I had sent this on Friday. Anyways here is the updated version.
>>
>> I corrected the issues you mentioned.
>>
>> You can generate code with codeworker, the generated code needs the
>> static library.
>> There aren't any dynamic library shipped yet.
>> The static library is also used when you want to use codeworker in a
>> c++ program.
>
> Strip the 'a' from COMMENT, they're useless..
> It doesn't respect CXXFLAGS (ie try $CFLAGS=-DFOO CXXFLAGS=-DBAR
> make). it will turn on -Wall which will show tons of interesting
> warnings.. MAKE_FLAGS is not ok, you add $(INCDIRS) as bindly done in the
> Makefile but it is not set at this point (and it's useless). CC/CXX should
> be honored too, as it should be c++ and not g++ as gmakes uses CXX
> for the objects that don't have an explicit target.
>
> Atm, i have
> MAKE_FLAGS = CXXFLAGS='${CXXFLAGS}' LFLAGS='-lm' CC='$CXX}' CXX='${CXX}'
> which correctly uses CXXFLAGS and makes a correct use of CC/CXX without
> patching Makefile. Well, it overrides CC with CXX as it's used in the
> Makefile when building generator.cpp/codeworker binary.. so in the end
> the makefile shouldbe patched too so that it respects
> CXXFLAGS/LDFLAGS for the explicit codeworker target.
>
Okay, so I patched the makefile, removed the a in the comment and
changed the MAKE_FLAGS.
But, there are way to many warnings with -W and -Wall. I already have
a few dozen patches which is too much. I've send some patches upstream
already. For now, I only saw initialisation list order warnings and
unused variables. But I haven't checked everything yet.
Should I repost the tarball without the patches for the warnings or
wait until it has been dealt upstream. (Should be fast enough)
Thanks for your help!
--
Vincent Auclair - auclair.vincent[ at ]gmail.com
(+33) 6 80 77 59 67
