Lukas Oboril wrote: > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 1:16 PM, David Finberg <David.Finberg at sun.com> > wrote: >> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Lukas Oboril wrote: >> >> >> >>>> 1) STDCXX doesn't properly deal with the compilers not being in >>>> /opt/SUNWspro, it does some header file mucking and moving based off of >>>> /opt/SUNWspro/prod/include and screws up for a non-default comiler. >>>> Check the Solaris directory for the offender. >>>> >>>> >>> It's quite hard handling with each possibilities for compiler path. I >>> would try to >>> fix that in next version of CBE. (KBE will be merge into CBE) >>> >> There's a hard path to /opt/SUNWspro in one of the configure scripts, if >> that could be changed to dirname $(CC) it might just work. Or maybe not. >> >> > > I'm planing something like that for next version of CBE (which will > replace KBE). Next relase should be within one month.
ah .. hmm. Last time I went through a compile cycle of KBE on Sparc (I never manage to continue much further before job-life kicks in, but that's a different story ...), I had the impression that it worked - I believe the result of that compile cycle is still available on bionicmutton ;-) As much as I admire and expect continuous improvement not only of KDE itself but also of the infrastructure (ie things like KBE - and I believe Luc has done a terrific job!), I wouldn't expect that to happen in the "mainstream", as it were. As it is, because KBE is frequently changing under our pants, I think people are having a hard time keeping up and working on K*D*E - and remember, that's what we are trying to get done! I'd advocate for a fairly stable (or "known good") release of KBE at a point in time that's not too far in the future (like yesterday ;-), and any further development in a branch/fork/sandbox, that only gets pushed back when a) it shows so much benefit that it outweighs the inconvenience or b) we have a serious problem with the existing KBE that a simple patch(*) cannot address. regards Michael *) I know, I'm not defining what that is :-) PS: if you get the impression that I'm repeating myself, that's probably because I am. -- Michael Schuster http://blogs.sun.com/recursion Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion'
