Am Mittwoch, 29. April 2009 11:25:31 schrieb Duncan Coutts:
On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 19:03 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
[...]
As usual, things are always a bit trickier than they appear initially: On
non- Windows systems it is not always sufficient to link against libGL
alone, sometimes you'll
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 19:44 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
That's why the autoconf macros are so tricky. Re-inventing the wheel in
Haskell is not something I'd like to do. Note: I see autoconf as a necessary
evil, not as a glorious tool. The predefined autoconf macros contain man
years
(if not
The thing is, it doesn't really matter if autoconf macros work fine for
every Unix ever invented. The Windows users simply cannot use packages
with configure scripts. They complain about it a lot. We can call them
foolish for not installing cygwin/mingw, but they will not do it and
instead will
On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 23:31 +0100, Claus Reinke wrote:
The thing is, it doesn't really matter if autoconf macros work fine for
every Unix ever invented. The Windows users simply cannot use packages
with configure scripts. They complain about it a lot. We can call them
foolish for not
If someone wants to use a unix shell on an unknown platform, they
should at least check that one exists there or -even better- provide
one, not just assume that there'll always be one (and then be surprised
about getting complaints from those windows users). Same for
autoconf, make co.
You
On Mon, 2009-04-27 at 19:03 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
Am Montag, 27. April 2009 00:11:20 schrieb Duncan Coutts:
On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 19:03 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
[...]
* How to link programs using OpenGL
This is because the GL libs are called different names on different
Am Montag, 27. April 2009 00:11:20 schrieb Duncan Coutts:
On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 19:03 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
[...]
* How to link programs using OpenGL
This is because the GL libs are called different names on different
platforms right? But they're consistent within each platform, it's
Am Donnerstag, 9. April 2009 00:28:35 schrieb Peter Verswyvelen:
Yes I totally agree that it is overkill. Ideally I would like every package
to install on Windows without requiring MinGW. But I was just explaining
the situation as it is right now.
Well, I don't like using autoconf, either, but
On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 19:03 +0200, Sven Panne wrote:
The build process in itself is purely Cabal-based, it is only the
configuration above which done via autoconf. So in theory you could write the
few output files of the configure run by hand and then use Cabal, without any
MinGW/MSYS or
