Hi Brent, Brent Gulanowski schrieb: > robertosfield wrote: >> Hi Brent, >> >> I'm not a OSX users, but do occasionally compile up on OSX machines >> (mostly remote login) and always use cmake and Makefiles so can't >> comment too specifically on XCode projects as I never use these. >> You can generate XCode projects from CMake, but haven't tried this, >> the Cmake generated XCode projects are the future, the old hand >> maintained XCode projects are officially deprecated. Stephan Huber >> currently maintains the old XCode projects and keeps them roughly >> in sync. > > > I see. However, it seems counter-intuitive to me to use an automated > tool to generate project files meant primarily to be read and > processed by Xcode, for human users. Why not just generate build file > formats themselves designed for automated processing? Xcode is a user > tool. If you're going to use Xcode to do OSG development, then it > only makes sense to manage the project by hand.
THis makes sense for your own project utilizing osg. There's no need to use xcode to build frameworks, which you can include into your own projects. And there's no need to use cmake for your own projects. Cmake is great to reduce the hassle of maintaining different build tools for the osg-libs, -plugins and -examples. What you use for your own projects is in your hand. For example I am using xcode for a client-project including the dylibs generated by a cmake-based-build. With some love of install_name_tool you can even bundle the dylibs in your app-bundle. > While this is true, it does not lead to problems of the sort I'm > experiencing. All Xcode 3.x version are able to read and write Xcode > 2 and later formats. The project file in the distribution is set to > Xcode 3, and I'm using the iPhone Dev Kit v3, which uses Xcode 3.1.3. You mentioned instabilities. I've seen this too with the new Xcode-versions. I am using xcode 3.1.3 and most of the time I have no problems with the osg-project-files. > I'll check it out. Although I wouldn't be too quick to declare > Xcode's build system to be missing such features. It's a lot more > powerful and flexible than people seem to realize. Not that it's > perfect, by a long shot. I am by no means an xcode expert so I am interested in some more infos regarding this stuff. > But it sounds to me (from the OS X Readme) > that cmake has some hurdles to overcome itself. cmake gets better and better with every version. The only missing piece on the osg/os x front for me is building of embeddable frameworks. Theoretically cmake can do this, but I didn't have time to try it out. > cmake may be the > future for OSG, but Xcode is the present and the future for > developers on Mac OS X. It's actively maintained and being enhanced > by Apple all the time. This is not a 1 vs. 0 decision. Use cmake to build the dylibs + plugins, use xcode for your own projects. No problems. cheers, Stephan _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
