httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>
Subject Re: Window's Makefiles
Date Sat, 24 Jan 1998 00:00:32 GMT
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> I think my point is that I can't believe that the windows development
> environment is this stupid.  It certainly wasn't when I worked at WATCOM 4
> years ago.  We were able to build multi-tool makefiles with a minimum of
> effort.

I can't believe it is that stupid either.  However, from what I can see it
is.

> 
> You need a .c.obj rule.  You need a linking rule.  You need a library
> building rule.

Making makefiles that are cross-tool compatible may not be that bad.
Heck, you could make people get gmake or something.  No big deal.  But I'm
not aware of any of the IDEs that use them for editing, and things are
complex enough that building your own set of configs for your IDE doesn't
make sense.  There is too much you just can't do from the command line.  I
am no Windows expert and would be thrilled if it could be done, but...

> 
> But given that I am 4 years out of date on this crap I'll just have to
> take your words for it.
> 
> Dean
> 
> On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Paul Brophy wrote:
> 
> > Time. And considering how much we're all getting paid for this... If I'm
> > working on the NT build, do I really want to tweak n-thousand makefiles
> > (and invoke the wrath of those platform supporters)? I think not.
> > 
> > How about we only officially support non vc++ environments. Then, those of
> > who prefer IDEs will continue working as we do now (and this discussion can
> > end).
> > 
> > Now if we only had a per platform/compiler demi-god...
> > 
> > ----------
> > > From: Dean Gaudet <dgaudet@arctic.org>
> > > To: new-httpd@apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Window's Makefiles
> > > Date: Friday, January 23, 1998 3:07 PM
> > > 
> > > This seems quite stupid.  Beyond a CC definition, a linker definition,
> > and
> > > a librarian definition, all of these files should be the same.  Why
> > should
> > > we support only visual c++ when we could support more windows compilation
> > > environments?
> > > 
> > > Dean
> >  
> > 
> 


Mime
View raw message