[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?
From: |
Nicola Pero |
Subject: |
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option? |
Date: |
Tue, 13 Nov 2007 13:40:31 +0100 (CET) |
>> "3) Eliminate the need for GNUstep.sh..."
>>
>> Well, this one wasn't a biggie for me... but I still had to run the
>> GNUStep.sh to get things to compile.
>
> GNUstep.sh is still needed to compile, but not to run GNUstep
> applications. The new GNUstep.conf contains the configuration files
> needed to run things. Getting rid of GNUstep.sh completely would be
> nice, but as long as it only affects developers, not users, I don't
> consider it a major problem.
Technically, it's all done, even if we need packagers/everyone to take advantage
of it and present/document it nicely for users. At the moment, for a confused
user
trying to get started quickly, sourcing GNUstep.sh might be simpler than
editing PATH or library paths.
Anyway I suppose this is using the default flattened GNUstep filesystem layout
? :-)
In which case, the following comment (from core/make/FilesystemLayouts/gnustep)
applies:
# If the layout is flattened, it's still a good idea to source
# GNUstep.sh if it's not too much trouble for you, else you can
# manually add /usr/GNUstep/System/Tools and /usr/GNUstep/Local/Tools
# to your PATH, /usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Libraries and
# /usr/GNUstep/Local/Library/Libraries to your LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or
# /etc/ld.so.conf + ldconfig).
#
# To use gnustep-make in this environment, source GNUstep.sh or use
# 'export GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES=/usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Makefiles'.
In other words, you can avoid sourcing GNUstep.sh if you add your program paths
to your PATH, add your library paths to your LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or equivalent on
your operating system), and use
export GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES=/usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Makefiles
before compiling. Btw, if the GNUmakefile has been updated to use
gnustep-config,
this last step is not even required.
Thanks
PS: If you use the fhs layout, then you don't even need to set PATH or
LD_LIBRARY_PATH,
but you need to remember to run ldconfig (or equivalent on your operating
system)
each time you compile a library. If gnustep-config is also used in the
GNUmakefiles,
then you have to do absolutely nothing - everything should just work (except for
having to run ldconfig after you compile a library)
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, (continued)
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Mark Grice, 2007/11/13
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Riccardo, 2007/11/13
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Helge Hess, 2007/11/13
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, markjoel60, 2007/11/13
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Daniel Santos, 2007/11/14
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Markus Hitter, 2007/11/14
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Mark Grice, 2007/11/14
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Aria Stewart, 2007/11/14
- Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Philippe Roussel, 2007/11/14
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?,
Nicola Pero <=
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Gregory John Casamento, 2007/11/13
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Gregory John Casamento, 2007/11/13
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Gregory John Casamento, 2007/11/14
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Gregory John Casamento, 2007/11/14
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Daniel J Farrell, 2007/11/14
Re: So, honestly, is GNUStep a viable development option?, Nicola Pero, 2007/11/14