Craig Setera wrote:
>
> Just got back from a business trip and have made it through my mail...
> One other potential option *might* be to use a combination of Cygnus'
> Win32 tools and Microsoft's? I don't know a lot about it, but there is
> the objcopy utility in the binutils package. In the Win32 version, it
> appears to know both of the relevant object formats. I don't know a lot
> about all of the various tools, but it seems that it might be possible
> to use cygwin to compile the assembly portions and then convert to the
> appropriate object format using objcopy. From there, VC++ could be used
> to compile the rest and link it. Does this sound crazy? Is there
> anyone that knows more about this? If that is even possible, we are
> going to need to have anything that might not be compilable by VC++
> placed into separate source files and handled differently by the make
> files.
That's a good suggestion. I suppose we could offer one *.o file
that was precompiled and objcopy'd, with the source distro as well.
The other issue that comes up, is how to ./configure the source
so it can be compiled in Win32/MSVC++ land. There's enough variables
that it kinda blows having to manage two build environments. One
solution I had thought of for non-configure-capable systems was
this. Have a web page (on a Unix machine) that would run configure
for you and configure for a Win32/MSVC++. Then it offers you
a *.zip file which is the source distro with all the Makefiles
and config.h files generated for you.
Since there will likely be lot's of configure options, this would need to
be dynamic; you could enter in configure options on the web page,
and it would pass them all to configure, and custom build a
*.zip source distro for you, on demand.
If this idea is well received, it would make a great web project
for someone willing.
-Kevin
