On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Szak�ts Viktor wrote:

Hi Viktor,

> I'd like to ask opinions whether to introduce wince
> as a distinct architecture in the GNU-make system.
> This would replace current w32/mingwce, w32/msvcce,
> w32/poccce builds with wince/mingw, wince/msvc,
> wince/pocc.

Dont' you afraid that we will end with winvista, winxp,
win9x, win64 and other subdirectories?

> It would be useful because it would make it easier
> to enable/disable contribs for this platform.
> As of now, following contribs should have been
> disabled for WinCE builds: hbwhat, hbole, hbmysql,
> gtalleg, hbtpathy, hbfimage.

Most of them are libraries which needs 3-rd party libs.
If such libs will be in WinCE version then they should
work. hbole should be fixed.

> [ Some of these could probably be fixed to compile
> under WinCE, but some definitely not. ]

Which one?

> It would also allow to better sync non-GNU make
> with GNU make by changing HB_BUILD_WINCE=yes to
> HB_ARCHITECTURE=wince.

I do not think so. HB_BUILD_WINCE is used to mark that it's
a cross build not only to mark destination platform.
In GNU make HB_XBUILD is used for it. There are different
possible combination of cross building and of course also
native builds. So far we do not have native WINCE builds
but it may change in the future with increasing PocketPC
capabilities. It's technically possible even now with
MinGWCE but because I do not have such needs I haven't
added such possibilities so far.
Now HB_XBUILD is used in some *nixes to create Win32/64/CE
binaries and in Win32/64 to create WinCE binaries. I plan
to add OpenWatcom cross build support too. Adding separate
support for HB_ARCHITECTURE=wince does not inform that it's
a cross build so second variable is still necessary.

best regards,
Przemek
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour

Reply via email to