• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script


  • Subject: Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script
  • From: Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 08:59:03 -0800

On Jan 27, 2007, at 4:59 AM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
I still don't see what changing it to an Xcode project buys you aside from forcing a thorough review of the code base to check for possible multi-architecture problems.

It buys you all the features of Xcode. If you don't need 'em, don't do it!


Personally, I live by the whole cmd- and opt- double click stuff, code sense completion, emacs bindings in the text editor, the debugger UI, and a slew of other features.

But -- of course -- my development focus is on building software for Mac OS X.

And Xcode does handle build variants and multiple architecture builds quite nicely.

It turns out that I'm not much of an IDE user, so a thorough review of the possible multi-architecture problems and some careful editing of m4, configure.ac and Makefile.am seems reasonable to me.

Sure -- which is effectively what converting to an Xcode project does; a thorough review of the source. I find it to be less effort to review the source and maintain a couple of .h files + the project than dealing with the autoconf stuff.


Your mileage may very.

I'm still not disagreeing that the autotools handle multi-arch build well, they don't, but converting everything to an Xcode project is not the only solution.

Didn't say it was -- the original point was that simply passing '- arch i386 -arch ppc' to ./configure is not typically going to yield the expected result *and* that the failure modes are often subtle and particularly unfun to debug.


I like having a build system that will work everywhere, using a different build system for every platform would make my head explode.

I only use a different build system for Mac OS X. The rest of the systems I work with -- a slew of different Linux boxes and an occasional Solaris box -- all build single architectures at a time and work just fine with autoconf.


Windows? I'm fortunate to be able to ignore Windows as a target platform for my code.

b.bum


_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script
      • From: Syd Polk <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script (From: Bill Northcott <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script (From: Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script (From: Bill Northcott <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script (From: Bill Bumgarner <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script (From: "Peter O'Gorman" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Profiling Tools
  • Next by Date: Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script
  • Previous by thread: Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script
  • Next by thread: Re: Universal build of cranky open source lib with a configure script
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread