[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GDL2 - patches for OSX (1)

From: Stéphane Corthésy
Subject: Re: GDL2 - patches for OSX (1)
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 22:44:12 +0100

On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 02:57 PM, Nicola Pero wrote:

But it seems quite reasonable what Stephane said - that #ifdef are going to be mostly used to make a difference between GNU/GNUstep and NeXT/Cocoa, and so would be required no matter what make system is used to build on

So I interpret you correctly we should to something like:

#ifndef __AppKitDefines_INCLUDE
#define __AppKitDefines_INCLUDE

#ifdef APPKIT_WITH_DLL || GNUSTEP_WITH_DLL    <---------

#if BUILD_libgnustep_gui_DLL
#  define APPKIT_EXPORT  __declspec(dllexport)
#  define APPKIT_DECLARE __declspec(dllexport)
#  define APPKIT_EXPORT  extern __declspec(dllimport)
#  define APPKIT_DECLARE __declspec(dllimport)


#  define APPKIT_EXPORT extern


#endif /* __AppKitDefines_INCLUDE */

As this seems to be what would be needed to support this issue of
Apple's build system.

Thanks David for the example - interesting point - I was assuming that
Stephane would be using Project Builder on Apple only, and that on Windows
you would always be using GNUstep.

I use PB only on OSX, no Windows. If I ever need to use gdl2 on Windows, I'll use the standard gnustep distribution/makefiles, and whatever gui I can find. (note to David: yes, Apple are silently building their soft on x86, but don't tell it to anyone :-P)

I submitted these #ifdef ...DLL... because I thought you still needed them on Windows, as it was needed in OpenStep time.

If it's so, then


is enough (GNUSTEP_WITH_DLL would only be defined on Windows when
compiling using GNUstep, and not in all other cases). If not ... well yes that might complicate things, and I'd be less favourable to see the OSX PB
support in there. :-)

At the moment I think maintaining two separate build systems seems the
main issue to me. That was a very good remark, and we must be very clear about which one is the `officially supported/recommended' way of building.

But my suggestion - as a very general principle - is to try to address and support other users' requests for integration/porting (if those requests don't compromise the project's design and aims). It's part of an 'open',
'free' philosophy after all. :-)

I personally don't like PBX, and would really prefer to stick with
GNUmakefiles as our main building system. But that does not have to be a
religious crusade.  I don't see any major disruption to our headers in
saying Stephane can build on PBX, and distribute PBX project files to
build stuff on PBX, so (with the clause the GNUmakefiles are the official build system, that they must always be kept updated etc) I'd support it.

Maybe as separate files (distributed separately) if you so prefer.

I'll maintain the PBX file, because I won't use another gui on OSX. I don't mind if it's not in the official distribution. Adam recently added my PBX files for gnustep base, but also added a notice stating that it's not the official build system, and is maintained by third-party.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]