On Wed, 25 May 2011 11:50:37 +1000, Lex wrote: >On 25 May 2011 11:34, Chris Sutcliffe <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 24 May 2011 21:23, Lex Trotman wrote: >>> Why not just use the absolute pathname of the executable? >>> >>> PS Thats so obvious I presume you have tried it and I guess I am >>> asking why doesn't it work, does it work on the command line? >> >> That`s not the issue (and that solution would work in most cases). >> The issue is I have a common Makefile for both architectures that I >> use (it calls gcc/g++), which works well because I set the path prior >> to calling make and the appropriate compiler is used. I guess I >> could pass which compiler to use to make, which would resolve the >> issue. > >I would always recommend an explicit parameter over hidden things like >setting PATH, makes it more maintainable and less fragile.
I'd second this. For both way, you can use a set of commands as Lex already mentioned (the build system guru himself :D). So, this is nothing new, just a bit more detailed. To make the commands use the right tool, you can set environment variables in the command itself, like: TARGET=mingw32 make.exe I should note that this works fine on Linux, I didn't try it on Windows. But it's worth a try and quite easy. Regards, Enrico -- Get my GPG key from http://www.uvena.de/pub.asc
pgpfXkfZ51iW5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Geany mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany
