I don't think building with free tools has ever been a stated goal. Sure, it would be nice, but it's not practical for Win32 development, and it's really not that important, considering that most Win32 users would rather just have a binary and don't care at all what kind of source licensing is involved.
Lynn Allan wrote:
Inquiring (newbie) minds want to know: * Has anyone tried to build BibleCS (Win32) with the free command-line Microsoft compiler that comes with their SDK?
This may have been discussed ad-nauseum in the past, so, por favor, have grace on this newbie. In the list archive, I did track down an extended thread about the Borland compiler earlier this year, but didn't see the Microsoft SDK compiler mentioned.
My impression is that the Sword project has an objective that the sources should be rebuildable with free tools. There are .bpr files for the Borland C++Builder x.x. My understanding is that there is a magical procedure to generate C++Builder 5.5 makefiles for command line compilation, but I've never figured that out, or come across documentation how to do that.
There are also .dsw and .dsp files for Microsoft VisualStudio-98 to rebuild diatheke (seems to work!) and ActiveDiatheke.ocx (which seems broken ... I've submitted fixes).
Fixes to ActiveDiatheke were committed about a week ago. Let me know if you're still having problems.
In any case, I was wondering if anyone has attempted to use the free command-line C++ compiler that comes with Microsoft's SDK? VisualStudio-98 can generate makefiles that are compatible with nmake (VisualStudio-2003 doesn't, as near as I can tell).
I was going to see what hurdles might be involved, but thought I'd see if this has been attempted and/or solved in the past.
TIA
_______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
_______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
