Re: GDL2 - patches for OSX (1)

[Stéphane Corthésy]

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
> > > Cocoa.
> >
> > 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)
> > #else
> > #  define APPKIT_EXPORT  extern __declspec(dllimport)
> > #  define APPKIT_DECLARE __declspec(dllimport)
> > #endif
> >
> > #else /* GNUSTEP_WITH[OUT]_DLL */
> >
> > #  define APPKIT_EXPORT extern
> > #  define APPKIT_DECLARE
> >
> > #endif
> >
> > #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
>
> #ifdef GNUSTEP_WITH_DLL
>   ...
> #else
>   ...
> #endif
>
> 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.

Stéphane