libdo is completely unneeded on OS X, and has been factored out by wrapping its functionality the the platofrm-specific Do.Platform.Linux assembly.
Patrick, much more is involved here than simply pressing "build" in XCode. My advice is to open Do.mds in MonoDevelop, and try to build, ignoring the configuration scripts and just reading runtime errors once you get it to build. David On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Bas <[email protected]> wrote: > An application can't suddenly change into a .app folder, even if you got it > to build it would be a simple PE file you'll need to manually launch with > Mono that can't launch anything. :-) libdo is pretty annoying when doing > cross-platform stuff, sadly it manages keybindings, but it only works on X11 > systems -- that's not Win32/OS X (note that I know OS X provides X11, but > not as default). :) > > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:02 AM, Patrick Tulskie > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> So even if I got it to build it wouldn't work? >> >> I got it far enough along so that I get this: >> checking for LIBDO... configure: error: Package requirements (glib-2.0 >> gdk-2.0 gdk-x11-2.0 gtk+-2.0) were not met >> >> I have all of those libraries in the Mono framework but the configure >> script can't seem to find them even after setting the LIBDO_LIBS to >> point at /Library/Frameworks/Mono.framework/Libraries >> >> Chris - I've never made OS X binaries myself before so I don't really >> have any expertise in building something like Do into a .app. XCode >> usually does the work for me when I need a .app file. >> >> On Mar 28, 3:18 am, Bas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > It would still not be really usable -- no OSX specific applications >> would be >> > supported... even the ApplicationsItemSource would look for .desktop >> files, >> > instead of .app folders :) >> > >> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Chris Szikszoy < >> [email protected]>wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > It would be great if we could get someone to make OSX binaries. Do >> > > you have any expertise in this area Patrick? >> > >> > > -Chris S. >> > >> > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Patrick Tulskie >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > > Ok great. I'll have to give it a shot this weekend then. I'm just >> > > > tired of how buggy and slow Quicksilver has been I'm curious as to >> > > > whether or not this will be a good replacement. >> > >> > > > On Mar 27, 12:38 am, David Siegel <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> Yes, a few have built and run Do on OS X. It should be pretty easy >> to do >> > > >> these days. Grab Macports, Mono, and chase dependencies until it >> runs. >> > >> > > >> David >> > >> > > >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 7:59 PM, Patrick Tulskie >> > > >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> > >> > > >> > Just out of curiosity - has anyone tried to build Do on OS X? >> Are >> > > >> > there any reasons why it wouldn't build? My initial interest in >> Do >> > > >> > was to get it working on Windows, but since I haven't used a >> Windows >> > > >> > box in months, I've kind passed on that idea. >> > >> > >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GNOME Do" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gnome-do?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
