Re: Build tools discussion

> I can troubleshoot as soon as I finish adding svn_cstring functions as > apr_cstr (new for 1.6). > > Just to be sure we are on the same page, you are at APR(-util) 1.5 and > log4cxx trunk? Yes, I am using the recommended version of the apr project page, i.e. apr-1.5.2 and apr-util-1.5.4 >

Re: AW: Build tools discussion

I can troubleshoot as soon as I finish adding svn_cstring functions as apr_cstr (new for 1.6). Just to be sure we are on the same page, you are at APR(-util) 1.5 and log4cxx trunk? On Jan 26, 2016 11:15, "Wiebesiek, Torsten" wrote: > > I'd a reference doc for Linux with make here. > > > > > http

AW: Build tools discussion

> I'd a reference doc for Linux with make here. > > http://chandpriyankara.blogspot.com/2014/01/building-log4cxx-from-dev-trunk-new.html > > I can help you in case any issues here. Thank you, especially for pointing to autoreconf. Unfortunately, configure still fails at the same point: > configu

Re: Build tools discussion

On Jan 26, 2016 08:36, "Thorsten Schöning" wrote: > > > I ignored the warning but the call to configure failed: > >> configure --with-apr=path-to-my-apr-installation > > ./configure: line 16480: syntax error near unexpected token `;' > > ./configure: line 16480: `APR_FIND_APR( , , 1, 1)' > > Provi

Re: Build tools discussion

For nearly all UNIX, the system deployed iconv is usually sufficient (often part of clib or in libiconv). On windows it is another story, since distributing libiconv is now a mishmash of LGPL+GPL. My pet project is to wrap the BSD Citrus implementation in a BSD licensed win32 build as a drop in i

Re: Build tools discussion

Guten Tag Wiebesiek, Torsten, am Dienstag, 26. Januar 2016 um 14:36 schrieben Sie: > At first I tried it on my Manjaro installation. I've downloaded, > compiled and installed apr-1.5.2, apr-util-1.5.4 and > apr-iconv-1.2.1. I am not sure, if the latter is even needed. apr-util uses apr-iconv as w

Re: Build tools discussion

I'd a reference doc for Linux with make here. http://chandpriyankara.blogspot.com/2014/01/building-log4cxx-from-dev-trunk-new.html I can help you in case any issues here. regards, *Chand Priyankara* [image: Facebook] [image: LinkedIn]

AW: Build tools discussion

Hello, in order to be able to prepare a release of log4cxx, I have to learn a lot. Sorry guys. At first, I would like to build svn head on my available platforms. These are Linux with gcc and Windows with Visual Studio 2015. Can someone help me with the configuration and compilation step? At

Re: Build tools discussion

Guten Tag Wiebesiek, Torsten, am Montag, 11. Januar 2016 um 10:28 schrieben Sie: > Sorry, if my questions appears to be stupid: is the site generated > automatically or is someone using maven to create it and then copies it to > the server? The latter, mvn is executed manually, generates the sit

AW: Build tools discussion

> > In fact, former releases of > > log4cxx already contained project files generated by cpptaasks. > > Even if we drop cpptasks for build purposes, will we still need > Maven to use the current site generation? Sorry, if my questions appears to be stupid: is the site generated automatically or i

Re: Build tools discussion

Guten Tag Rhys Ulerich, am Sonntag, 10. Januar 2016 um 21:32 schrieben Sie: > Even if we drop cpptasks for build purposes, will we still need Maven > to use the current site generation? Yes, I even think in combination with some logic of ANT's build.xml, but didn't look at the details yet. But t

Re: Build tools discussion

On Jan 10, 2016 13:09, "Thorsten Schöning" wrote: > > Guten Tag Wiebesiek, Torsten, > am Sonntag, 10. Januar 2016 um 19:03 schrieben Sie: > > > I don't want to start a general discussion about which build system > > is best. Such thing does not exist. > > But some day we need to decide, e.g. if a

Re: Build tools discussion

> In fact, former releases of > log4cxx already contained project files generated by cpptaasks. Even if we drop cpptasks for build purposes, will we still need Maven to use the current site generation? - Rhys

Re: Build tools discussion

Guten Tag Wiebesiek, Torsten, am Sonntag, 10. Januar 2016 um 19:03 schrieben Sie: > I don't want to start a general discussion about which build system > is best. Such thing does not exist. But some day we need to decide, e.g. if a complete rewrite for CMAKE is preferable over staying with autoco

Re: Build tools discussion

IDE's log4cxx project files to avoid manual crafting of Makefiles? Best regards, Torsten -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Thorsten Schöning [mailto:tschoen...@am-soft.de] Gesendet: Freitag, 8. Januar 2016 15:30 An: 'Log4CXX Dev' Betreff: Build tools discussion Guten Tag Wieb

Build tools discussion

Guten Tag Wiebesiek, Torsten, am Freitag, 8. Januar 2016 um 13:28 schrieben Sie: > log4cxx need one well documented cross platform build process. From my experience such a thing doesn't exist. I can't remember ANY of my used OSS projects using ANY build tool promising cross platform support witho