This patch rewrites some internal code (making it more complex, not more easy, but I suppose it's a matter of taste) and the only visible effect I can see is that it destroys the non-flattened (ie, fat binary) support in gnustep-make. :-(
Fat binaries *will* be/are supported in gnustep-make v2, and given all the effort that was spent to keep that very difficult feature working across massive changes in going from gnustep-make v1 to gnustep-make v2, I do want it to be clearly advertised and marketed. :-) No way we're dropping it right now once all the work has been completed and we're on track with gnustep-make v2. Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Matt Rice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Fri, February 16, 2007 8:25 pm To: Adam Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Developer GNUstep <[email protected]> Subject: Re: gnustep-make experiment On 2007-02-15 12:44:18 -0800 Adam Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 15, 2007, at 7:35 AM, Gregory John Casamento wrote: > >> >> Have we even tried, experimentally, doing this refactoring to see >> if it >> actually would make things simpler? The best way to prove a point >> is >> code. I would like to see if it can be done. >> >> While I understand it's not *strictly* needed for FHS >> compliance..... it >> is something that many developers, outside of GNUstep, use on a >> daily >> basis. >> >> If someone can produce a patch which would simplify gnustep-make >> that uses >> pkg-config, I really don't see a reason not to consider including >> it. > > I don't really see the point of this. It might be nice to support > pkg-config for those who want it, but pkg-config doesn't even come > close to > supporting the requirements of GNUstep development. First, > pkg-config is > only for developers. Maybe it would be useful for writting a few > tools and > such using GNUstep, but for anything more complicated? Why would a > developer want to used all the advanced capabilities of the GNUstep > envirnoment AND want to write all their Makefiles from scratch using > pkg-config? Seems counter-productive. > > As Nicola said, it doesn't even simply things, either. > well attached is a patch anyways which implements a step-config program in c, it is very similar to pkg-config, but provides a c api and some output formats make has been modified to output a file gnustep-config.make so step-config only needs to be run once... gnustep.cfg unlike gnustep.conf is required GNUstep.sh has been modified to run step-config instead of the other way around This patch is against yesterdays svn so its possibly a little bit out of date a few things to note, it defers to the environment, so if GNUstep.sh wants to set something like library-combo etc, it should pick that up GNUstep.sh doesn't really want all variables just some of them, so i still need to add support for outputting multiple specified variables then GNUstep.sh just needs to go -x foo -x bar for all the variables it does want. and it currently doesn't clean gnustep-config.make. <foo.diff> _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
