Re: GDL2 - patches for OSX (1)

[David Ayers]

Stéphane Corthésy wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Apple's ProjectBuilder doesn't use Makefiles by default: they use jam 
> instead of make, and the jam file is created on-the-fly by PB during 
> compilation. No risk of cluttering Makefiles.
> Headers need some modifications, whatever make system is used, because 
> I use Apple's Foundation instead of GNUstep's. 

But our GNUmakefiles might need to be clutterd to handle the OS X 
triggered modifications in the headers.

> I don't know whether Nicola wants to support Apple's runtime too: do 
> the makefiles support it, or do they support only GNUstep's? 

AFAIK that's what the --with-library-combo configure option is all about.

> Personally I prefer using PB, because I find it's a good IDE. I can 
> easily maintain project, perform changes, searches, edition of code. 
> Of course it's a different make system that would need to be 
> maintained separately. 

I agree that we need to get some more work done in ProjectCenter.  (That 
was what you were implying wasn't it ;-) )  Something I also dropped 
after noticing that a lot of the problems I had with it were actually 
gui issues.  But I think once the new text system stabalizes, it would 
be great if some one took another shot at it.

> Anyway, if you prefer not including in the official distribution, no 
> problem: I will maintain it and provide people an up-to-date version, 
> as well as for other projects like gnustep base, gsantlr and gsweb. I 
> let you maintain your makefiles, I won't use them: my target is OSX 
> currently.

Like I said, AFAIK, you can target OS X and use gnustep-make.  It's too 
bad if your don't want to supply patches for our GNUmakefiles which is 
really rather straight forward.  But as they are really rather straight 
forward, I don't really have a problem with updating them to fit your 
patches, it just might postpone things.  Which is not to imply that you 
patches are not welcomed!

Cheers,
Dave