On 2009-07-23 05:37:24 -0400, Jacob Carlborg said:
Yes: http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd-installer
I'm still waiting for Walter to add the osx installer to the dmd download page.
Speaking of that OS X DMD installer, are you sure installing it at
/usr/share/dmd/ is a good idea? Normally /u
Michel Fortin wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
location and they will overwrite each other. I'd much prefer if D2 and
D1 could coexist without having to go with a special installer or custom
installation instructions. Otherwise it'll be hard for me t
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
Bright wrote:
> Michel Fortin wrote:
>>
>> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
>> location and they will overwrite each other. I'd much prefer if D2 and D1
>> could coexist without having to go with a special installer or cu
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
> Bright wrote:
>> Michel Fortin wrote:
>>>
>>> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
>>> location and they will overwrite each other. I'd much prefer if D2 and
>>> D1 could coexist without having
Lutger wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
Bright wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
location and they will overwrite each other. I'd much prefer if D2 and
D1 could coexist without having to
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
> Lutger wrote:
>>
>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
>>> Bright wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
>
> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
> locat
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Lutger wrote:
>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
>>> Bright wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
> location and they will overwrite each other. I'd m
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
Will you rename the DMD2 compiler to 'dmd2' as well?
No. If they're in different directory trees, there's no reason to. After
all, that's the whole point of having directories!
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Lutger wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> Lutger wrote:
>>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>>
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
Bright wrote:
> Michel Fortin wrote:
>> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and D2 installer install at the same
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Walter
Bright wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>> Will you rename the DMD2 compiler to 'dmd2' as well?
>
> No. If they're in different directory trees, there's no reason to. After
> all, that's the whole point of having directories!
That seems to be the way
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
Yeah, let me know when that happens. Until then, I'd like to continue
to be able to use my build tools that were designed for D1 without
having to modify all their config files.
I don't know what build tools you're using, but consider make:
-- win32.mak
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Walter
Bright wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, let me know when that happens. Until then, I'd like to continue
>> to be able to use my build tools that were designed for D1 without
>> having to modify all their config files.
>
> I don't know what bui
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
This "D" programming language is great because it obviates make.
Ok, now about make's ability to switch compilers without having to edit
config files?
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Walter
Bright wrote:
> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>
>> This "D" programming language is great because it obviates make.
>
>
> Ok, now about make's ability to switch compilers without having to edit
> config files?
So editing every make file you have is better? :P
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Jarrett
Billingsley wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Walter
> Bright wrote:
>> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>>>
>>> This "D" programming language is great because it obviates make.
>>
>>
>> Ok, now about make's ability to switch compilers without having to ed
Bill Baxter wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Lutger
> wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>
>>> Lutger wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Walter
> Bright wrote:
>> Michel Fortin wrote:
>>> If I'm not mistaken, both your D1 and
Walter Bright wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
This "D" programming language is great because it obviates make.
Ok, now about make's ability to switch compilers without having to edit
config files?
So that's the killer feature of make? I don't know about you, but I
always use only one D
or
custom installation instructions. Otherwise it'll be hard for me to
offer the choice between D1 and D2 in Xcode (and I certainly do want
that choice to be available).
Thoughts?
I've been switching the directories to {dmd, dmd2} so they can coexist.
I know. But the OS X installer I se
Walter Bright wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
This "D" programming language is great because it obviates make.
Ok, now about make's ability to switch compilers without having to edit
config files?
I don't do it that way. I can't imagine when you would mix D1 and D2 in
a single build.
In
On 2009-07-24 03:51:50 -0400, Don said:
Walter Bright wrote:
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
This "D" programming language is great because it obviates make.
Ok, now about make's ability to switch compilers without having to edit
config files?
I don't do it that way. I can't imagine when you
On 7/23/09 12:32 PM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-07-23 05:37:24 -0400, Jacob Carlborg said:
Yes: http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmd-installer
I'm still waiting for Walter to add the osx installer to the dmd
download page.
Speaking of that OS X DMD installer, are you sure installing it at
/
Walter Bright wrote:
I don't know what build tools you're using, but consider make:
-- win32.mak -
DMD=\dmd\windows\bin\dmd
target : foo.obj
foo.obj : foo.d
$(DMD) -c foo
--
And for GNU make, it uses the variables $(DC) and $(DMD)
where DC is the D c
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Speaking of that OS X DMD installer, are you sure installing it at
/usr/share/dmd/ is a good idea? [...]
I looked at a gdc installer and looked where it placed the compiler and
did the same. I don't know where it's best to place the compiler.
You can use /opt/dmd and /op
On 2009-08-01 04:41:38 -0400, Anders F Björklund said:
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Speaking of that OS X DMD installer, are you sure installing it at
/usr/share/dmd/ is a good idea? [...]
I looked at a gdc installer and looked where it placed the compiler and
did the same. I don't know where it's
Michel Fortin wrote:
You can use /opt/dmd and /opt/dmd2, if you don't
want to use the regular file hierarchy in hier(7)
In hier(7), it says that "/usr/local" is for "executables, libraries,
etc. not included by the basic operating system", so I guess DMD fits
this quite well.
I normally* u
Sat, 1 Aug 2009 07:55:08 -0400, Michel Fortin wrote:
> On 2009-08-01 04:41:38 -0400, Anders F Björklund said:
>
>> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>
Speaking of that OS X DMD installer, are you sure installing it at
/usr/share/dmd/ is a good idea? [...]
>>> I looked at a gdc installer and look
On 2009-08-01 20:15:41 -0400, Sergey Gromov said:
Here's a nice document about directory layout in UNIX-like OSes:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html
I think MacOS should follow this layout at least in part. In particular
/usr/local/ is used for locally installed packages which oth
Michel Fortin wrote:
Well, given that this is Mac OS X we could also put this in
/Library/D/dmd and /Library/D/dmd2, two directories which aren't hidden
by the file browser. Then put symlinks in /usr/local/bin and
/usr/local/lib pointing there. Users will then be able to upgrade
without an in
On 8/2/09 03:40, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2009-08-01 20:15:41 -0400, Sergey Gromov said:
Here's a nice document about directory layout in UNIX-like OSes:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html
I think MacOS should follow this layout at least in part. In particular
/usr/local/ is used fo
On 2009-08-03 06:59:14 -0400, Jacob Carlborg said:
I think I like /usr/local best.
I like /usr/local best too.
/Library is used for resources:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/BPFileSystem/Articles/LibraryDirectory.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20002282-BAJHCHJI
"The
Michel Fortin wrote:
I think I like /usr/local best.
I like /usr/local best too.
The objection (if any) was mostly about "/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin"
vs /usr/local/bin, but using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} should be OK.
Library directory is a special directory used to store
application-specific and
On 8/3/09 14:32, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
I think I like /usr/local best.
I like /usr/local best too.
The objection (if any) was mostly about "/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin"
vs /usr/local/bin, but using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} should be OK.
I was thinking about using /usr/loca
On 2009-08-07 08:05:04 -0400, Jacob Carlborg said:
On 8/3/09 14:32, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
I think I like /usr/local best.
I like /usr/local best too.
The objection (if any) was mostly about "/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin"
vs /usr/local/bin, but using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2
On 2009-08-07 08:05:04 -0400, Jacob Carlborg said:
I was thinking about using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} and then create
symlinks to /usr/local/bin. But that will create problems with the
dmd.conf because it also needs a symlink in /usr/local/bin and then the
conf file for dmd and dmd1 will confli
Michel Fortin wrote:
The objection (if any) was mostly about "/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin"
vs /usr/local/bin, but using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} should be OK.
I was thinking about using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} and then create
symlinks to /usr/local/bin. But that will create problems with the
dmd.conf b
On 8/7/09 17:32, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Michel Fortin wrote:
The objection (if any) was mostly about "/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin"
vs /usr/local/bin, but using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} should be OK.
I was thinking about using /usr/local/{dmd,dmd2} and then create
symlinks to /usr/local/bin. But tha
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
The solution is to create a "symlink program" and drop it in
/usr/local/bin. I know it works; I wrote one to do just that:
#include
int main(unsigned int argc, char **argv) {
argv[0] = "/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin/dmd";
execv("/usr/local/dmd/osx/bin/dmd", argv);
}
I did tha
On 2009-08-12 19:37:13 -0400, Anders F Björklund said:
Guess one could use the same workaround for moving
dmd over to "dmd1", and make dmd into a symlink ?
dmd -> dmd1 # depending on
dmd -> dmd2 # your preference
That's something I'd really like to see.
--
Michel Fortin
michel.for...@michel
Michel Fortin wrote:
Guess one could use the same workaround for moving
dmd over to "dmd1", and make dmd into a symlink ?
dmd -> dmd1 # depending on
dmd -> dmd2 # your preference
That's something I'd really like to see.
It's done the same with GCC, too:
/usr/bin/gcc -> gcc-4.0
/usr/bin/gcc
The Mac OS X installer on dlang.org/dowloads says it is for i386 but
it's actually for 64bit.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 12/25/11 5:11 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
The Mac OS X installer on dlang.org/dowloads says it is for i386 but
it's actually for 64bit.
Fixed. Looking good?
Andrei
On 2011-12-26 01:31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/25/11 5:11 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
The Mac OS X installer on dlang.org/dowloads says it is for i386 but
it's actually for 64bit.
Fixed. Looking good?
Andrei
Yes, thanks. Now I'm just waiting for the D1 version.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
42 matches
Mail list logo
