Hi all

I see that I have missed i nice discussion including roughly sketched
plans for world domination and death to all those who stand in out way
towards 60+ fps :-)

But you are right of course - we can't ignore this silly/stupid
problem. Better just do our best early. This means that i'll be
bringing a windows laptop into my house. My kids will be contaminated,
ill and never return but it's for a good course right ;-)

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Jean-Sébastien Guay
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Sukender,
>
>> I'm in favor of keeping the ability to create debug packages, but let the
>> release be the default and standard ones. Doesn't it fit the needs of
>> anyone?
>
> Yep, it does. We need to be able to make both debug and release packages, at
> least on Windows. I don't know what control we have over the package name,
> to add debug and release to the names, perhaps only on Windows... Mattias?

I don't think the naming will be the hard part. I don't know if this
is hard at all. I've been resistive mostly because the currently lean
implementation of cpack in our source/script tree will get cluttered
with IF(WIN32)..ELSE...ENDIF blocks. Maintainability and readability
will suffer.

I'm thinking in terms of 2.8.0. It's soon right? What we have now
isn't streamlined for what we want on windows with the debug compiled
libs, so what do we need to make good windows packages given some
manual steps? Am I right in that what we want (on windows) is
libopenscenegraph-<ver>-win32-x86-vc80sp1.tgz with release dlls
libopenscenegraph-<ver>-win32-x86-cv80sp1-dev.tgz with debug dlls, rel
and debug libs, headers
or is it
libopenscenegraph-<ver>-win32-x86-vc80sp1-release.tgz with release dlls
libopenscenegraph-<ver>-win32-x86-vc80sp1-debug.tgz with debug dlls
libopenscenegraph-<ver>-win32-x86-cv80sp1-dev-release.tgz with release
libs and headers
libopenscenegraph-<ver>-win32-x86-cv80sp1-dev-debug.tgz with debug
libs and headers

I would say that the former looks better while the latter will
certainly be easier to get/less intrusive on our CMakeLists. I'm not
sure the former is possible at all given the current functionality in
cpack.

I'll be going away tomorrow so can't really have a go at this until
the next day. In the mean I'll be looking for a proper subduction
zone.

Mattias

>
> J-S
> --
> ______________________________________________________
> Jean-Sebastien Guay    [email protected]
>                               http://www.cm-labs.com/
>                        http://whitestar02.webhop.org/
> _______________________________________________
> osg-submissions mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org
>
_______________________________________________
osg-submissions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-submissions-openscenegraph.org

Reply via email to