Re: [RFC] Header organization of -base & -gui

[David Ayers]

Nicola Pero wrote:

> I very much like using library-combos (such as 'gnu-gnu-gnu') instead of
> `gnustep' as header directories because they make clear, at least to an
> advanced user, what we are talking about.  They are consistent with the
> names/directories we use for object files.  People who don't need
> library-combos (most of them) can just --enable-flattened in
> gnustep-make's ./configure and forget about them.  People who need
> library-combos have a single unified way of organizing headers and
> libraries and frameworks and applications.  It will also help future
> changes (such as simplification or advancements of library-combo support)
> to be made consistently and simply on all areas.
>  
As long as we don't mind the duplication of header files (for every 
project), we can do this.

> ==
>
> The existing options (--enable-flattened and --enable-multi-platform) in
> gnustep-make's ./configure should be enough to support this.
>
> Maybe we could change the default as Adam seems to suggest, and make the
> default --disable-flattened and --disable-multi-platform.
>
> That seems still open to discussion.  Opinions on that ?
>  
Like I said, I have no objections.  I didn't have a clear understanding 
of the semantics of -multi-platform, but now after reading the comments 
in make/configure.ac, this only seems to effect GNUstep.sh talking into 
account that users from different plattforms may source it and require a 
minimum developing environment to allow GNUstep.sh/config.guess to do 
thier determination of the platform.

> > Configuring with --enable-multi-platform allows someone to use both gc 
> > and non gc versions of gnustep simultaniously. (Actually is that true? 
> > Can you install two runtime versions of the ObjC runtime?  But that's 
> > irrelevant here because the corresponding gnustep libraries could be 
> > installed on the same fileserver.)
> >    
>
> --enable-multi-platform as it is now has nothing to do with using gc and
> non-gc versions of gnustep at the same time; I assume you are talking of 
> a future proposed implementation.
No, it was just a lack of understanding.

I guess if we default to --enabled-flattend then the header duplication 
shouldn't be much of an issue.  I would be fine with it.

Cheers,
David