Side by side. Mmmm, if we're talking side by side right back to CVS, we really ought to be sure we want to do this. Basically we'd be committing to maintaining our own wx fork indefinately. Moving back to the standard distro might not be so easy in the future...
No, I don't want it put into cvs
Andreas Pflug wrote:
Side by side. Mmmm, if we're talking side by side right back to CVS,
we really ought to be sure we want to do this. Basically we'd be
committing to maintaining our own wx fork indefinately. Moving back
to the standard distro might not be so easy in the future...
No, I d
Raphaël Enrici wrote:
Andreas Pflug wrote:
That said, a single build system really would be nice.
If we have wx in a subdirectory of our source tree top side by side
to src, the make process can do it in a single build. In this case,
we wouldn't need to have wx installed, thus minimizing th
Hi Dave,
I nailed down and fixed another clipboard bug. Actually, it's the same
problem we had with gtk, so I extended an existing patch.
I uploaded a cumulative patch to snake, but for compiling a new wx
snapshot you'd probable be better off if you apply the attached patch
separately. Since th
Hi Andreas.
setup0.h isn't contained though "wx-20031026.patch" of the accumulation.
you think that it was particularly excluded.
Write it in readme-patches.txt.
Because I was stupid, I did Make-Test again.:-(
Does the thing which contains it become wxWindows-pgAdmin3-20031010-6.t
