On Tue, 24 Oct 2006, Dennis Schridde wrote:
DS> Am Dienstag, 24. Oktober 2006 09:35 schrieb Yaroslav Kolomiyets:
DS> > Dear Warzone2100 Developers,
DS> >
DS> > Sometimes it is necessary (and easy) to have multiple deployments of
DS> > SDL. FreeBSD ports maintainters organize things so there may be many
DS> > instances of one thing: autoconf253 and autoconf259, automake14 and
DS> > automake19.
DS> >
DS> > To build Warzone2100 on such system it is requered to make several
DS> > changes in code:
DS> >
DS> > I. AutoTools part:
DS> >
DS> > a) make the autogen.sh accept alternative autoconf/automake binary
DS> > names. After patch-A-autgen.sh applied it is possible to run it as:
DS> >
DS> > $ env AUTOCONF_VERSION=259 AUTOMAKE_VERSION=19 ./autogen.sh
DS> You mean provide an autotools wrapper in our autogen.sh?
DS> This is really the task of the OS and not our, IMHO.
DS> You should provide a wrapper script around autoconf/automake which you can
DS> instruct to use a specific version of autotools, eg with WANT_AUTOCONF=2.60
DS> or WANT_AUTOMAKE=1.10
DS> Other OS/Distros handle this completely different and I don't think we
could
DS> provide a specific hack for all of them. Gentoo eg. has autoconf-2.60 and
not
DS> autoconf260...
Provided patch is suitable for Gentoo too:
$ env AUTOCONF_VERSION="-2.60" AUTOMAKE_VERSION="-1.9" ./autogen.sh
DS>
DS> > b) Slightly modify m4/sdl.m4 so it accepts alternative name of
DS> > sdl-config script via SDL_CONFIG environment variable.
DS> > This modification is in patch-B-m4__sdl.m4
DS> Seems like a bug in the sdl.m4... Did they forgot the : or did they
intendedly
DS> leave it out? (Doesn't make so much sense as they could then also have left
DS> out the +set entirely...)
DS>
DS> - AC_PATH_PROG(SDL_CONFIG, sdl-config, no, [$PATH])
DS> + AC_PATH_PROGS(SDL_CONFIG, [$SDL_CONFIG sdl-config], no, [$PATH])
DS> Is this needed? Can we just change sdl-config to $SDL_CONFIG?
DS> SDL_CONFIG get's defined to a default value if it is missing on the lines
DS> before...
I think it is needed because previous lines set SDL_CONFIG only if
either --with-sdl-prefix or --with-sdl-exec-prefix is provided on
'configure' command line.
DS>
[ . . . skipped . . . ]
DS> >
DS> > c) replace all
DS> > #include <SDL/``header''>
DS> > with
DS> > #include <``header''>
DS> I guess this was also intended by the SDL guys? (Otherwise they wouldn't
have
DS> set the SDL includepath... Still seems a bit ugly to me, but ok, if they
like
DS> it that way...
Looks OK to me: almost every SDL header has ``SDL_'' prefix. So
neigther name conflicts should occur nor developers be confused.
DS>
DS> > This can be done by applying the patch-D-lib+src
DS> ===================================================================
DS> --- src/projectile.h (revision 435)
DS> +++ src/projectile.h (working copy)
DS> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
DS>
DS>
/***************************************************************************/
DS>
DS> -#include "lib/framework/types.h"
DS> +#include "lib/framework/frame.h"
DS> #include "base.h"
DS> #include "statsdef.h"
DS> #include "movedef.h"
DS>
DS> Is that a mistake or intended?
DS>
It is not mistake, I've just missed to comment this. I'm not sure
whether it is related to build problems but according to directive in
"lib/framework/types.h" line 12, "Framework header files MUST be
included from Frame.h ONLY". So this change just make the
"projectile.h" follow this convention.
Thank you.
--
Yaroslav
_______________________________________________
Warzone-dev mailing list
Warzone-dev@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
