On 12/2/2012 12:55, Jon wrote:
>>> However, if you choose to use autotools, to better support the
>>> build-for-windows-on-windows scenario I ask that you also maintain a
>>> mingw32-make compatible Makefile. IIRC, this was Ozkan's suggestion near
>>> the very beginning of the discussion.
>>
>>
> > However, if you choose to use autotools, to better support the
> > build-for-windows-on-windows scenario I ask that you also maintain a
> > mingw32-make compatible Makefile. IIRC, this was Ozkan's suggestion near
> > the very beginning of the discussion.
>
> Do you mean by this "not msys" ?
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jon wrote:
> However, if you choose to use autotools, to better support the
> build-for-windows-on-windows scenario I ask that you also maintain a
> mingw32-make compatible Makefile. IIRC, this was Ozkan's suggestion near the
> very beginning of the discussion.
> As for your concerns about CMake being available or not: it's
> available from all Linux and BSD variants I know because more and more
> projects are moving to CMake because more and more projects are
> concerned about cross-platform, including MSVC. It's not something
>
On 12/2/2012 06:27, Jon wrote:
As for your concerns about CMake being available or not: it's
available from all Linux and BSD variants I know because more and more
projects are moving to CMake because more and more projects are
concerned about cross-platform, including MSVC. It'
> >> As for your concerns about CMake being available or not: it's
> >> available from all Linux and BSD variants I know because more and more
> >> projects are moving to CMake because more and more projects are
> >> concerned about cross-platform, including MSVC. It's not something
> >> esoteric.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:49 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>>
>>
>> Really, I haven't seen any build system that I think is wonderful.
>> autotools works for us, but it's not great. I've used a lot... even
>> scons.
>
> just for curiosity : what do yo
>This is intriguing. Can you give some detail on how it works for
>cross compiling?
xml file definition regarding libraries and executables exists in
*.bkl files(similar to ant), bakefile will generate the makefiles from
*.bkl files for specific make tools.
It works perfectly in wxWidgets.
Rega
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 6:49 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>
>
> Really, I haven't seen any build system that I think is wonderful.
> autotools works for us, but it's not great. I've used a lot... even
> scons.
just for curiosity : what do you think of jam or one of its
derivatives (ftjam, bjam, etc...)
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles
wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:29 PM, NightStrike wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>
>> In the cmake world, to do the same thing, Dave has to be a lot more
>> knowledgeable of the internals of our project. He needs to know what
>> languages we use
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:36 PM, deneme.true wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As I know, wxWidgets uses bakefile(http://www.bakefile.org/index.html)
> system. Probably, bakefile is good for cross building of Makefiles for
> nmake,mingw-make,make etc.
This is intriguing. Can you give some detail on how it wo
On 12/1/2012 09:32, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>
>> When I want to compile an autotools project, I need sh, which as you have
>>> already said, is only half-legged available on Windows. And that's the
>>> whole point of CMake, especially when Visual C++ is in the middle. Sure,
>>> you can generate
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 1:15 AM, JonY wrote:
I tried cmake, it didn't like that I was trying to use MSVC inside
> Cygwin by making too many assumptions in the generated makefile. The
> produced Makefile was not gmake compatible.
>
> I thought cmake was supposed to be better than autotools in the r
On 12/1/2012 06:49, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>> Now of course, we could
>> try to provide these system-specific files that cmake should be giving
>> us for free, but then we'd have to maintain (thus somehow be able to
>> test) every conceivable system that our users might have or want to
>> use.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:29 PM, NightStrike wrote:
[...]
> In the cmake world, to do the same thing, Dave has to be a lot more
> knowledgeable of the internals of our project. He needs to know what
> languages we use, what compilers we need, how to call them, how to set
> them up, what the di
Hello,
As I know, wxWidgets uses bakefile(http://www.bakefile.org/index.html)
system. Probably, bakefile is good for cross building of Makefiles for
nmake,mingw-make,make etc.
--
Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel:
T
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Zouzou wrote:
> On 30/11/12 15:29, NightStrike wrote:
>> In the autotools world, there is a very defined and extremely enforced
>> concept that above all, our goal is to make it *TRIVIAL* for the end
>> user to compile your software. Now let's clarify this. The e
On 30/11/12 15:29, NightStrike wrote:
> In the autotools world, there is a very defined and extremely enforced
> concept that above all, our goal is to make it *TRIVIAL* for the end
> user to compile your software. Now let's clarify this. The end user
> is the guy who knows nothing about developme
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:22 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles
> wrote:
>> As for your concerns about CMake being available or not: it's
>> available from all Linux and BSD variants I know because more and more
>> projects are moving to CMake because m
On 11/12/2012 16:22, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles
> wrote:
>> As for your concerns about CMake being available or not: it's
>> available from all Linux and BSD variants I know because more and more
>> projects are moving to CMake because more and more
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles
wrote:
> As for your concerns about CMake being available or not: it's
> available from all Linux and BSD variants I know because more and more
> projects are moving to CMake because more and more projects are
> concerned about cross-platform, i
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:14 AM, JonY wrote:
> From what I gather, I'll need to:
>
> 1. Write an external tool/driver to do this.
> 2. Split into subprojects.
> 3. Have cmake call itself recursively.
Errr... no
1. Write a CMakeLists.txt for the compiled-to-host-platform projects
2. Write a CMak
On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 07:14:42 +0800
JonY wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 03:36, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jon wrote:
> >
> >> So here's the question.
> >>
> >> Can the method I use when cross-compiling, namely, use cmake's
> >> `ExternalProject` module (causes cmake
On 11/12/2012 03:36, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jon wrote:
>
>> So here's the question.
>>
>> Can the method I use when cross-compiling, namely, use cmake's
>> `ExternalProject` module (causes cmake to run itself and generate artifacts
>> in a different dir) to
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Jon wrote:
> So here's the question.
>
> Can the method I use when cross-compiling, namely, use cmake's
> `ExternalProject` module (causes cmake to run itself and generate artifacts
> in a different dir) to pre-build an environment on the build system that's
>
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 19:13:04 +0800
JonY wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 18:50, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, JonY wrote:
> >
> >>> What were the "rigidities"? Maybe I can help
> >>
> >> We need to a way to inject .a libraries with additional objects compiled
> >> from
On 11/11/2012 18:50, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, JonY wrote:
>
>>> What were the "rigidities"? Maybe I can help
>>
>> We need to a way to inject .a libraries with additional objects compiled
>> from a different step,
>
> See add_library(OBJECT):
>
> http://www
2012/11/11 Kai Tietz
> 2012/11/11 niXman :
> > 2012/11/11 Kai Tietz:
> >> So any help for it is most welcome. The build-system is an important
> >> issue, but even more we need developers/reviewers of it and a lot of
> >> support :)
> >
> > I wish to take part in development/testing of this proj
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> The ironCrate project has as one goal that it shall be API-compatible
> to msvcr*.dll (means best providing same API as msvcr100.dll from
> user-perspective. For sure I won't be able - and don't intent to make
> it 100% feature compatible. Fo
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 11:27 AM, JonY wrote:
>> What were the "rigidities"? Maybe I can help
>
> We need to a way to inject .a libraries with additional objects compiled
> from a different step,
See add_library(OBJECT):
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake/Tutorials/Object_Library
(in the past you
2012/11/11 niXman :
> 2012/11/11 Kai Tietz:
>> So any help for it is most welcome. The build-system is an important
>> issue, but even more we need developers/reviewers of it and a lot of
>> support :)
>
> I wish to take part in development/testing of this project.
> Where I can get the sources?
>
2012/11/11 Kai Tietz:
> So any help for it is most welcome. The build-system is an important
> issue, but even more we need developers/reviewers of it and a lot of
> support :)
I wish to take part in development/testing of this project.
Where I can get the sources?
--
Regards,
niXman
Hi Vaclav,
2012/11/11 Václav Šmilauer :
>
>> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
> Just for my knowledge (I am new to mingw), has ironCrate different goals
> than other non-MS implementations of MSVC runtime? I imagine reactos
> must have one, for instance.
So I am finally detected this
On 11/11/2012 18:02, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> Any decent build system needs that kind of constructs. Is the CMake
> syntax a bit different from autotools'? Sure. So what? With CMake you
> do exactly the same checks you did with autotools, only you may need
> to consider some Windows specifics w
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:05 AM, JonY wrote:
>>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>>
>> Lol, no.
>
> See the
> https://github.com/mruby/mruby/blob/master/cmake/modules/IntrospectSystem.cmake
> example.
How is this different from what you would to in configure.ac in autotools?
AC_CON
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:14 AM, JonY wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 16:42, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM, JonY wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>>
>> As Ruben says, it's not the case.
>>
>> The main problem with autotools is they do not support W
On 11/11/2012 16:42, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM, JonY wrote:
>
>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>
> As Ruben says, it's not the case.
>
> The main problem with autotools is they do not support Windows. Even
> with CoApp, autotools support is far f
On 11/11/2012 16:34, Ruben Van Boxem wrote:
>>> I think he means "macro" and "module" files. Usually you distribute
>>>
>>
>> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
>
> Lol, no.
>
See the
https://github.com/mruby/mruby/blob/master/cmake/modules/IntrospectSystem.cmake
example.
>
> Wrong.
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM, JonY wrote:
> Sounds like they are reinventing autotools.
As Ruben says, it's not the case.
The main problem with autotools is they do not support Windows. Even
with CoApp, autotools support is far from *acceptable* on Windows.
>> A "toolchain" file is just a f
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 9:43 AM, niXman wrote:
> If I only could, I on a global scale would forbid autotools use, and I
> would provide criminal punishment for violation of this prohibition =)
IMHO, autotools are perfectly fine if you are on a Unix-based
operating system. The moment Windows enter
If I only could, I on a global scale would forbid autotools use, and I
would provide criminal punishment for violation of this prohibition =)
--
Regards,
niXman
___
Dual-target(32 & 64-bit) MinGW compilers for 32 and 64-bit Windows:
http://sourcef
Op 11 nov. 2012 09:27 schreef "JonY" het
volgende:
>
> On 11/11/2012 15:59, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:39 AM, JonY
wrote:
> >
> >>> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake
really is quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to
On 11/11/2012 15:59, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:39 AM, JonY wrote:
>
>>> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake really is
>>> quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to use.
>>>
>>> For example, I contributed the following cm
On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 2:39 AM, JonY wrote:
>> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake really is
>> quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to use.
>>
>> For example, I contributed the following cmake build scripts to the mruby
>> project
>>
>> https
> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
Just for my knowledge (I am new to mingw), has ironCrate different goals
than other non-MS implementations of MSVC runtime? I imagine reactos
must have one, for instance.
vaclav
--
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 09:39:26 +0800
JonY wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 02:22, Jon wrote:
> >
> > It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake really is
> > quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to use.
> >
> > For example, I contributed the following cmake build
On 11/11/2012 02:22, Jon wrote:
>
> It's unfortunate you both had bad experiences with cmake. Cmake really is
> quite powerful, and recent syntax mods make it friendlier to use.
>
> For example, I contributed the following cmake build scripts to the mruby
> project
>
> https://github.com/mru
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 01:22:18 +0800
JonY wrote:
> On 11/10/2012 23:39, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> > On 11/10/12, Ruben Van Boxem wrote:
> >> 2012/11/10 Ozkan Sezer
> >>
> >>> On 11/10/12, Luis Lavena wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
>
On 11/10/2012 23:39, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On 11/10/12, Ruben Van Boxem wrote:
>> 2012/11/10 Ozkan Sezer
>>
>>> On 11/10/12, Luis Lavena wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
>
> I hav
On 11/10/12, Ruben Van Boxem wrote:
> 2012/11/10 Ozkan Sezer
>
>> On 11/10/12, Luis Lavena wrote:
>> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
>> > wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
>> >>
>> >> I have written a small CMakeLists.txt file to get
2012/11/10 Ozkan Sezer
> On 11/10/12, Luis Lavena wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
> >>
> >> I have written a small CMakeLists.txt file to get automated compilation
> >> working (I know you g
On 11/10/12, Luis Lavena wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
>>
>> I have written a small CMakeLists.txt file to get automated compilation
>> working (I know you guys favor autotools, I don't). I am running
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
>
> I have written a small CMakeLists.txt file to get automated compilation
> working (I know you guys favor autotools, I don't). I am running into some
> issues building the source fro
Hi,
I have the crazy idea to help with ironCrate.
I have written a small CMakeLists.txt file to get automated compilation
working (I know you guys favor autotools, I don't). I am running into some
issues building the source from the get-go.
I wanted to ask if I could just start trying to fix eve
54 matches
Mail list logo
