Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Makefile generation ideas
Makefile generation ideas [message #8908] Fri, 06 April 2007 22:29 Go to next message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
I have a few minutes twiddling my thumbs as I recompile a bunch of source and thought I would start a discussion of possible upgrades to the Makefile generator... (ps I hope this is the appropriate place to post this).

There has been a number of discussion lately about future support of pkg-config, LSB compliance, and general fixes. A couple of these things I can help with patching the Makefile generator. Before I wast time on hacking, I thought I would start a discussion about the behavior people would like to see, and then what is reasonable to implement in the short term.

For starters, I would like to clean up the generated Makefile so that it can build and install upp/theide from within upp. I do not think that this is to far-fetched to accomplish. Most of the changes have already been discussed elsewhere. Here are a few for reference:

*) support listing libraries and C*FLAGS with pkg-config (directly or indirectly).

*) support defining and installing binaries, data, libraries in both system and user space (ex install theide in /usr/bin as root, and ~/bin as a normal user).

*) properly calculate the source file dependencies.

and a couple of enhancements that I find rather annoying...

*) upgrading u++ does not blow away various configuration information (such as user app runtime directory and arguments).

*) allow runtime directory and arguments to be set per application ( very useful for automated unit and regression test suites).

So, if I implemented most of the above would it be integrated into u++?

What are some of the other issues people would like to see working?

Thank you for your consideration,


EBo --
Re: Makefile generation ideas [message #8916 is a reply to message #8908] Sat, 07 April 2007 09:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
ebojd wrote on Fri, 06 April 2007 16:29


So, if I implemented most of the above would it be integrated into u++?



Yes (if it works...Smile. In the worst case, it can be an option (e.g. in Setup - "New makefile generation").

BTW, I understand that as gentoo user/u++ maintainer, you are the most interested in makefile issues, probably more than anybody else here Smile

Mirek

[Updated on: Sat, 07 April 2007 09:09]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Makefile generation ideas [message #8922 is a reply to message #8916] Sun, 08 April 2007 01:55 Go to previous message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
luzr wrote on Sat, 07 April 2007 02:08


BTW, I understand that as gentoo user/u++ maintainer, you are the most interested in makefile issues, probably more than anybody else here Smile



Wink

EBo --
Previous Topic: Request for ChildKbdEvent()
Next Topic: ChildMouseEvent and DropList
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Mar 28 15:03:02 CET 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01368 seconds