Orthonormalize said: > now, that said, i've spent over a WEEK trying to build flightgear. only > today (i pray) will i finish the task. > > here are my observations: > > 1) the autoconf/configure process is extremely fickle. in my opinion there > are way too many "configurations" for flightgear. the problem seems in > trying to support every platform "out of the box", fightgear supports no > platform. i know that sounds harsh but try building it on a spare > laptop/desktop you have hanging around that has never seen any development > tools before. > > -my solution: prebuild a few Lowest Common Denominator configurations > (say lynux,windows and mac) and then call it a day.
I'm not sure what you are saying here (there is at least one of the top contributors that doesn't use any of those platforms). Many have built flightgear the first time in much less than a week. It took me about an hour or so on linux back about 3 years ago and mostly that was due to slow cpu speed. My guess is that whatever platform you are using has significant issues. It does get complicated, but other projects have demonstrated that broad multi-platform support is doable. If you can take what you've learned in the last week and apply it to help us support your platform better, that would be a win situation for all. > 2) there seems to be a lot of code that is in transition, like the > WeatherCM, Scripting modules. i was only able to compile after deleting > these. > -my solution: in the spirit of SimGear, create a new project (maybe > called FlightGearDevel) by pulling out the "cutting edge" development code. > The intent is to have working code in cvs :-) I'm not sure we need another branch, but we do need someone testing with your platform regularly so that anything that breaks either gets fixed right away or is backed out of cvs. Best, Jim _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
