httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: apachen/src/os/win32 ApacheOS.dsp ApacheOS.mak os.c os.h
Date Sat, 13 Sep 1997 12:15:35 GMT
Paul Sutton wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, Ben Laurie wrote:
> > Paul Sutton wrote:
> > > Erm, it's normal procedure on multiple-directory source projects to have
> > > the top level build do some initial setting up before the sub-directories
> > > are called. For example, setting up the correct OS environment.
> > > Unfortunately Win32 (or MSVC++) makes multiple directory environments
> > > difficult to manage in an open way (while maintaining the ability to use
> > > the IDE).
> >
> > I'm not sure what you think MSVC++ makes difficult to manage, but having
> > header files in a different directory isn't it.
> What makes MSVC difficult is its fundamental assumption that *all* the
> development process will be managed as a single workspace within the IDE.
> For example, when we moved the directories around recently *all* the
> projects (.dsp and .mak files) had to be updated with the new paths,
> interactively using the IDE. It would be nice to have a single place where
> all this information could be stored, which could be used within each
> makefile (say, by pregenerating the makefiles as in Unix, or by having a
> ".include" type functionality within the makefiles. Note that we have
> already accepted that we must have different makefiles for Unix and Win32,
> even when the build process is virtually identical (for example, in
> regex).

Of course, there's no reason one can't hand author the makefiles in
MSVC. Perhaps we should do this - if we ever want to do the equivalent
of Configure, we'll probably have to. I'll give this matter some more

> > What is wrong with it is that I right click on '#include "os.h"' to open
> > os.h, and it opens the wrong one. Or I browse to a function defined in
> > os.h, or...
> >
> > What's wrong with having it already in the right directory, and with an
> > appropriate name? Or in a different directory, and still called "os.h"?
> Because then you are putting an OS specific file within src/main (or
> wherever), whereas it should live in the OS specific directory. The
> correct way to do this would be to symbolically link from
> src/main/os.{c,h} to the real file's location in os/win32, but (of course)
> Win32 cannot do this.

You can't do a symlink, sure, but why can't we just leave it in



Ben Laurie            |Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435|Apache Group member
Freelance Consultant  |Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472|
and Technical Director|Email: |Apache-SSL author
A.L. Digital Ltd,     |
London, England.      |"Apache: TDG"

View raw message