Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Building one unified fgfs executable

2007-07-26 Thread Curtis Olson
One thing you might double check in your build system is whether or not you are compiling with debugging symbols (-g flag in gcc.) This is turned on by default with automake/autoconf. FlightGear's heavy use of the standard template library leads to huge volumes of debugging info being

[Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Building one unified fgfs executable

2007-07-25 Thread Hans Ulrich Niedermann
Tim Moore wrote: Hans Ulrich Niedermann wrote: puInitSDL(), puInitGLUT(), puInitNativ() instead of puInit(). These three functions cannot go away without plib breaking binary compatibility, and plib development is not very daring these days, so using these functions directly is not very

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Building one unified fgfs executable

2007-07-25 Thread Melchior FRANZ
* Hans Ulrich Niedermann -- Wednesday 25 July 2007: 23 files changed, 698 insertions(+), 184 deletions(-) Umm ... and this huge change only to stuff GLUT, SDL, *and* OSGVIEWER support into the same binary, as a minor development helper for two months or three, until we can rip out GLUT and SDL

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Building one unified fgfs executable

2007-07-25 Thread Hans Fugal
I've worked out the quirks with this patch on my machine and sent them to you personally, I just want to mention that it works well here and it's already saved me a few recompiles (or 900 MB disk space), so it's been worth it for me. On 7/25/07, Hans Ulrich Niedermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Building one unified fgfs executable

2007-07-25 Thread Hans Ulrich Niedermann
Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Hans Ulrich Niedermann -- Wednesday 25 July 2007: 23 files changed, 698 insertions(+), 184 deletions(-) Umm ... and this huge change only to stuff GLUT, SDL, *and* OSGVIEWER support into the same binary, as a minor development helper for two months or three, until