Markus Gothe wrote: > GCC is a gnuism with it's own non-iso extensions, not a real compiler > for except x86-based systems imo. ;)
I don't have much experience on other architectures than x86 with GCC. So, I can't confirm this statement. > For the boost part I discovered that the needed functions in boost can > easily be extracted by using CC -E. The whole smart prt code (including > shared pointers) is only ~26kb totally, so I don't see a reason not to > extract the wanted parts and include it with gnash, extends portability > too since we can add extra stuff/checks if necessary. It is definitely a > codebase with high quality. Markus, I think it's a good idea and I'm glad you've discovered it. I'd only give small proposal to keep files/modules structure consistent with "big" Boost. So, it will be possible to build gnash using the stripped version of components or using "big" Boost installation. ./configure -> builds with supplied Boost components or this way: ./configure --with-boost=/my/own/boost/installation What do you think? > I usually use ports/pkgsrc/portage to rule out the stability of a > package. Alas this might be far from the best way... :-& > > Adding this mail-thread to gnash-dev. I think I'm not subscribed to gnash-dev. Sorry, too many lists ATM. I'll subscribe in the October, so please forward my message to gnash if you want. Cheres -- Mateusz Loskot http://mateusz.loskot.net _______________________________________________ Gnash-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
