Re: [Bug-gnubg] make system

[Michael Petch]

Howdy,

A couple years ago I had added OS/X support (10.3) to the make facility so that basically (with the exception of a LIBGMP anomaly) it would build straight from a CVS pull. Until this past week I had not got around to trying this on 10.4.x.

Excluding your idea for something that asks for the type of build (I;m assuming you want soemthing that asks if you want 3dboards etc etc) - have you managed to get any builds of OS/X to work yet?

To start with I have managed to get a 2D Build to function on Tiger (Under 10.3 - 3d didn't work well or at all - would end in a segfault in Opengl). Next step will be try and get 3d to work (I had a Bus error on my first attempt, and will get it into a debugger later this week). Things I have noticed - removing LIBGMP and Freetype, and adding 4 new libraries to the default Common Libs has allowed me to get a 2D build to work (with sound). 

Have you had any success with OSX builds at all (2D? 3D?). WOuld like to know anything you might have come across.

Michael Petch

On 24-Aug-05, at 2:03 PM, Jon Nall wrote:

On 8/24/05, Joseph Heled <address@hidden> wrote:

gnubg is under the GPL, which makes it great for people like you who
would like to experiment.

i'm aware that i can go and modify the code any way i want. perhaps my question would be better phrased: would the primary authors accept a change to the current make system?

BTW, can you define "robust?"

i would consider a robust make system to allow checking out CVS head, configuring the type of build i want, and typing make. it's quite possible that this works for the main devs, but it certainly has never worked for me (on OSX). i simply think it can be done better, but don't want to waste my time if people won't be interested in it.
 

nall

_______________________________________________

Bug-gnubg mailing list

address@hidden

http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg