On 2007-02-16 22:21:35 -0800 Richard Frith-Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 17 Feb 2007, at 02:11, Matt Rice wrote:
On 2/16/07, Nicola Pero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt, thanks for your comments.
I understand your desire to centralize the configuration, but there
is an actual reason why GNUstep.sh is a pure shell script. ;-)
It's a machine-independent program that can be in a machine-
independent
directory
and that can then be used to bootstrap the fat binary system. :-)
Yes, my take is, people using weird configurations should not mind
doing
weird things GNUstep.sh can still set up the achitecture specific
environment variables
for 'step-config' to then use.
non-flattened configurations must then continue sourcing GNUstep.sh.
I feel very strongly that that is the wrong philosophy ... while we
obviously need to devote most attention to the needs of the majority,
we
should also try to make things easy for the minorities, and changes
that
make things harder for the minorities (or needlessly different for
different
groups) really need very good justification.
then we can add to step-config an option to set a specific variable
from the command line
similar to pkg-config's --define-variable=foo=bar which sets 'foo' to
'bar'.
then gnustep-make figures this out and sends it LIBRARY_COMBO, etc,
etc that when running step-config.
It seems kindof odd, but make's $(shell) function doesn't pick up
variables exported from inside the makefile
so that route is out.
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
