httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: Window's Makefiles
Date Fri, 23 Jan 1998 20:07:38 GMT
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

On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Marc Slemko wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Paul Brophy wrote:
> 
> > Maybe, but it's not that simple.  I build for Intel & Alpha targets. Since
> > the Unix guys can't test the Windows makefiles before they commit them,
> > they shouldn't change them. 
> > It's easy to maintain with the IDE (If I didnt want an IDE, I'd use WATCOM
> > C++) & I can be sure that the makefiles/workspaces actually work. 
> 
> I agree.  
> 
> There is a PR from someone about setup to use Borland's complier.  I
> really don't think we can handle the maintainence for multiple
> environments.  It sucks, but... I don't see that we have any alternative.
> 
> > 
> > Paul
> > ----------
> > > From: Dean Gaudet <dgaudet@arctic.org>
> > > To: 'new-httpd@apache.org'
> > > Subject: RE: Window's Makefiles
> > > Date: Friday, January 23, 1998 2:23 PM
> > > 
> > > I think you miss some of the point though... if the windows makefiles
> > were
> > > anywhere similar to the unix makefiles then the unix guys could maintain
> > > them and avoid breaking the build.  nmake is based on unix make... it's
> > > not all that much different.
> > > 
> > > Dean
> > 
> 
> 


Mime
View raw message