Re: [Texmacs-dev] virtualbox images?

[Michael Lachmann]

Interesting. I also thought to try something like a "union mount",
so that I'll mount the mac directory read-only, and on top of if a
union mount on the linux side.

Michael


On 13 February 2013 12:30, Gubinelli Massimiliano <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 12 Feb 2013, at 22:45, Michael Lachmann <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On 12 February 2013 12:17, Miguel de Benito Delgado
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> I use Parallels, which I find considerably superior to VirtualBox, under 
>>> MacOS at least. It's more stable, integrates perfectly with the system, has 
>>> "coherence" mode which is very handy, and many other things which just make 
>>> it better. It's not free, though.
>>>
>>
>
> Virtualbox works fine for me (and it is free). I use mainly to test Ubuntu 
> and sometimes Windows. For Windows you can set up quite easily a cross-dev 
> environment in Linux or Mac using MXE (http://mxe.cc)
>
> On the Mac I compile myself all the library needed (from gmp to qt) without 
> relying in MacPort or similar. You find the necessary material in 
> misc/tm-devel-mac (is based on the makefiles for MXE).
>
>
>> If we're already talking about virtual images.
>>
>> I can mount my TeXmacs svn directory from linux, or use it from OSX.
>> For now, to build the version for the respective platform, I do a full
>> switch... make clean; configure, make; make install
>> It would be nice if I could switch more easily between platforms. I
>> could have two separate source trees, but then it wouldn't be as easy
>> to make sure they are synced.
>>
>> It is somehow possible to compile for two different platforms on the
>> same source tree?
>
> the makefile does not support out-of-place builds. Some times ago I wrote an 
> incomplete patch to support this style of compilation but it is non-trivial 
> to suppport correctly the make process for the plugins: a better separation 
> of the platform dependent files and the sources would be needed. So the patch 
> remained in the limbo. I still have it on some of my machines but I'm not 
> sure it is up to date. Now I just check out different trees or use a local 
> git repository as Miguel suggested.
>
> I agree that for development a better out-of-place build support would be 
> needed.
>
>
> best
> max
>
>
> ps: if you are interested I attach it to the mail but I didn't applied it 
> since 2 years or so some maybe it requires some tweaking.
>
>
>
>> Probably not.. I guess one would have to keep the configure results
>> separate, all objects and all binaries.
>> But maybe...
>> so, is it possible?
>
>
>> Thanks!
>> Michael
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Texmacs-dev mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Texmacs-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
>