[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp
From: |
Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf |
Subject: |
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp |
Date: |
Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:03:43 +0200 |
On 15.07.2003 19:06:51 Enrico Sersale wrote:
>On 2003-07-15 18:56:12 +0300 Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf
><Lars.Sonchocky-Helldorf@bbdo-interone.de> wrote:
>
>> ...
>> your incorrectly set library-combo is visible here:
>> ...
>
>Can you tell me how to configure gcc 3.3 (fsf) on osx, please. I'm using:
> --prefix=/usr/local \
> --enable-languages=c,objc \
> --enable-threads \
> --enable-nls \
> --with-gnu-as \
> --with-gnu-ld \
> --without-included-gettext \
> --with-system-zlib \
> --enable-version-specific-runtime-libs
well, the last time I've build a gcc it was Apples gcc3 (a gcc3.1 derivate
at this time) The configuration was rather simple, just:
--prefix=/tmp/gcc3
and then I made it like this:
make CC='cc -no-cpp-precomp' bootstrap
I never tried the FSF gcc (and GNU runtime) so far since I always felt a
little unsettled concerning compiler builds (I had the feeling that I can
havoc my system if I do something wrong), but other seem to have succeeded
with this:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-11/msg00812.html
However consider this (and follow ups):
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-02/msg01296.html
I don't know if this did it make into cvs.
>
>but, when I try to compile base using it, I get: "gcc: cannot specify -o
with
>-c or -S and multiple compilations"
>
>Anyway, all this stuff comes from the fact that I want to assign the
GWorkspace
>copyryght to the FSF. This because it is an official GNUstep application
and
>now it is included in usr-apps.
Go for it!
>And, assigning the copyright to the fsf, I'll have to remove all the .nib
files
>that are actually included. (well, I'll distribute them in a separate
tarball,
>evidently)
Why so? Is it because those nibs can't contain the GPL copyright notice or
because they are considered binary files?
>So, I was wondering if it would be better to leave gworkspace using the
gnustep
>libs and write an osx back-end.
Interesting idea. But I am not sure if this will work. Won't those
different NSWorkspaces get in conflict somehow, each not knowing what the
other does? I think there is a reason for having the method
+ (NSWorkspace *)sharedWorkspace
to get the singleton(?) instance of NSWorkspace: Avoid multiple
NSWorkspaces to conflict. On the other hand: you basically would need a
gnu-gnu-gnu to apple-apple-apple brigde or the like to let the GNUstep-GUI
NSWorkspace communicate with the Apple-AppKit UI backend. I doubt this is
trivial.
>You have tried, for the first time, to build gw on osx; I've worked at
this,
>too. Actually I've not abandoned the project (and I remember a recent
your mail
>in which you expressed the intention of working on this again), but there
are
>many problems, first of them beeing the apple implementation of
NSWorkspace, if
>you remember.
I asume you're talking about this stupid
- (BOOL)getInfoForFile:(NSString *)fullPath application:(NSString
**)appName type:(NSString **)type
bug. Is this silly bug still in Mac OS X 10.2 (I fear so since I read
"Darwin6" in your compile output so you seem to use Mac OS X 10.2)? Apple
should fix this since it is documented not like it is but like it should
be in:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/ApplicationKit/ObjC_classic/Classes/NSWorkspace.html#//apple_ref/occ/cl/NSWorkspace
Can you send me your test program to reproduce this bug (So I can file it
too, making it more important (Yes, I know it was already a duplicate but
why not exert a little presure...))?
>I've a class (GWLib/OSXCompatibility.[hm]) that owerrides many
>NSWorkspace methods and implements something like the gnustep
make_services
>tool, but all the stuff has started to begin a little complex and ugly.
>What do you think?
Dunno, maybe wait and see if they fix it in 10.3?
>
>Ciao,
>Enrico
greetings, Lars
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, (continued)
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Pete French, 2003/07/14
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Nicola Pero, 2003/07/15
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Pete French, 2003/07/15
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Enrico Sersale, 2003/07/15
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Nicola Pero, 2003/07/15
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, David Ayers, 2003/07/15
- Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, David Ayers, 2003/07/15
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2003/07/15
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2003/07/15
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2003/07/15
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp,
Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf <=
Re: Makefile packages do not work oon OSX due to use of -traditional-cpp, Lars Sonchocky-Helldorf, 2003/07/16