On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 17:50:19 +0200 Christian Buhtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
CB> Sorry, but imap-lib sucks. I think you're mistaken. Its build system is unusual and its code is quite unusual too but it doesn't automatically mean that it's bad. CB> Before I touch the M-code the build-system should be reformed. Which one? CB> If I develop on a open-source project I want to use open-source software CB> for that (C::B and gcc). I used MSVC for a lot of years and I realy know CB> why I do not using it this time. Sorry, I don't understand this. What do you mean? CB> M itself is not the problem. As I see this time it would be very easy to CB> "port" it to MinGW gcc and Code::Blocks. But what is about the libs in it? I don't think there should be any problem with compface (it's a very simple library and we already have a makefile for it, see Makefile.M in its directory) nor dspam (it uses a standard configure-based build system). CB> Couldn't it be possible to compile and link them as libs or dlls? Well, this is what currently happens with MSVC -- we do build them all as static libraries. CB> They do not have to handle such dirty unprofessional code like the CB> imap-lib. I don't think you should call c-client unprofessional. Anyhow, as I said, it shouldn't be very difficult to reproduce the steps done by MSVC project in a C::B project, I think C::B should be at least as flexible as MSVC. And it's not really clear what alternative do you propose. Regards, VZ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Mahogany-Developers mailing list Mahogany-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mahogany-developers
