Peter Amstutz wrote: > Whenever I try to set up a VOS build environment on Windows, I get a > sharp, throbbing headache and a strong urge to throw my chair out the > window. It's difficult to understate just how big of a maintainance > hassle the current build system is on Windows (whether Cygwin, Mingw or > Visual Studio). It's so bad that I've seriously considered creating a > tarfile of the entire mingw tree on interreality.org as the recommend > way of setting up a VOS build environment. It takes me personally > several days of fiddling to get ter'angreal to build and work on Windows > on a new system. Automake is lovely on Unix, but it is an awful > cross-platform build system where the platform is not a unix variant. >
Well, automake works fine for me in general on MinGW whenever I've used it there, but never tried it with Visual Studio or Cygwin. Of course there's always the incompatible-versions problem with the autotools. And maintaining a ton of visual C files sucks, I have to do that all the time :) >> tools you list. If you do switch to bakefile, let's keep some Makefiles >> in the bzr tree. And keep bakefile inside the bzr tree so that you don't >> have to have it installed if you want to modify the makefiles. > The primary advantage of bakefile vs. jam or scons is that it generates > actual project files for various compilers, so users don't have to drop > down to the command line to build VOS when everything else they are > doing is in the IDE. That's good. If we can keep those project/make files in the tree without too much trouble then that would be an ok way to go. Let's also keep the bakefile source in the tree and in the source release too, especially if eventually we want vos to be buildable on all kinds of server operating systems (and where admins want to just run "make" and not have to install extra tools). Reed _______________________________________________ vos-d mailing list [email protected] http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
