Celestia

Chris Laurel wrote:
> Is anyone still using the build files in SVN? If not, I can just
> commit the updated build files that I'm using every day to build the
> Win32 version of Celestia with VS2005 EE and VS2008 EE. Otherwise,
> I'll probably need some help in getting them to work with VS2003.

I assume you mean the VS project files.

If they are always out of sync and provided externally, maybe they 
should be removed from the repository?

I assume the CMAKE stuff works, in which case a build method is 
satisfied for Windows.

--Pat

No, I was talking about the nmake files (which is what I assume you
mean by cmake). I just added some additional files to the Visual
Studio project file, so that's actually in better shape right now.

--Chris

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Pat Suwalski <pat@...> wrote:
> Chris Laurel wrote:
>  > Is anyone still using the build files in SVN? If not, I can just
>  > commit the updated build files that I'm using every day to build the
>  > Win32 version of Celestia with VS2005 EE and VS2008 EE. Otherwise,
>  > I'll probably need some help in getting them to work with VS2003.
>
>  I assume you mean the VS project files.
>
>  If they are always out of sync and provided externally, maybe they
>  should be removed from the repository?
>
>  I assume the CMAKE stuff works, in which case a build method is
>  satisfied for Windows.
>
>  --Pat
>

Chris Laurel wrote:
> No, I was talking about the nmake files (which is what I assume you
> mean by cmake). I just added some additional files to the Visual
> Studio project file, so that's actually in better shape right now.

Yes nmake.

- cmake for KDE
- dmake for OpenOffice
- gmake for GNU
- imake for XFree
- nmake for Windows
- qmake for Qt

Only so many letters in the alphabet -- autotools will soon become the 
easiest choice because people will be able to remember the name! :P

--Pat

Chris,
I haven't built on Windows from the CMD (with makerelease.bat) terminal for quite a while now. I've been building from the .vcproj file. But I do have all 3 compilers on my system yet if you want me to test build. You do mean building with makerelease.bat? Right? Currently I've been updating the .vcproj file myself.
cartrite 

Chris Laurel <claurel@...> wrote: No, I was talking about the nmake files (which is what I assume you
mean by cmake). I just added some additional files to the Visual
Studio project file, so that's actually in better shape right now.

--Chris

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Pat Suwalski 
 wrote:
> Chris Laurel wrote:
>  > Is anyone still using the build files in SVN? If not, I can just
>  > commit the updated build files that I'm using every day to build the
>  > Win32 version of Celestia with VS2005 EE and VS2008 EE. Otherwise,
>  > I'll probably need some help in getting them to work with VS2003.
>
>  I assume you mean the VS project files.
>
>  If they are always out of sync and provided externally, maybe they
>  should be removed from the repository?
>
>  I assume the CMAKE stuff works, in which case a build method is
>  satisfied for Windows.
>
>  --Pat
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Celestia-developers mailing list
Celestia-developers@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/celestia-developers



       
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

I still build with the nmake makefiles using VC++ Toolkit 2003 and the MS 
Platform SDK.

It was hell to setup, but I should probably upgrade to VS2005 EE.

-- 
Christophe

Le Wednesday 12 March 2008 19:10:04 Chris Laurel, vous avez écrit :
> No, I was talking about the nmake files (which is what I assume you
> mean by cmake). I just added some additional files to the Visual
> Studio project file, so that's actually in better shape right now.
>
> --Chris
>
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 10:56 AM, Pat Suwalski <pat@...> wrote:
> > Chris Laurel wrote:
> >  > Is anyone still using the build files in SVN? If not, I can just
> >  > commit the updated build files that I'm using every day to build the
> >  > Win32 version of Celestia with VS2005 EE and VS2008 EE. Otherwise,
> >  > I'll probably need some help in getting them to work with VS2003.
> >
> >  I assume you mean the VS project files.
> >
> >  If they are always out of sync and provided externally, maybe they
> >  should be removed from the repository?
> >
> >  I assume the CMAKE stuff works, in which case a build method is
> >  satisfied for Windows.
> >
> >  --Pat
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> Celestia-developers mailing list
> Celestia-developers@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/celestia-developers

Le Wednesday 12 March 2008 20:10:42 Pat Suwalski, vous avez écrit :
> Yes nmake.
>
> - cmake for KDE
> - dmake for OpenOffice
> - gmake for GNU
> - imake for XFree
> - nmake for Windows
> - qmake for Qt
>
> Only so many letters in the alphabet -- autotools will soon become the
> easiest choice because people will be able to remember the name! :P

Wouldn't it make sense to use cmake for our Qt build? The big advantage being 
that is produces native project/make files on all target platforms.

-- 
Christophe

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Christophe Teyssier <chris@...> wrote:
> Le Wednesday 12 March 2008 20:10:42 Pat Suwalski, vous avez écrit :
>
> > Yes nmake.
>  >
>  > - cmake for KDE
>  > - dmake for OpenOffice
>  > - gmake for GNU
>  > - imake for XFree
>  > - nmake for Windows
>  > - qmake for Qt
>  >
>  > Only so many letters in the alphabet -- autotools will soon become the
>  > easiest choice because people will be able to remember the name! :P
>
>  Wouldn't it make sense to use cmake for our Qt build? The big advantage being
>  that is produces native project/make files on all target platforms.

But qmake is already doing this for the Qt build, right? Pardon my
naivete regarding cmake.

--Chris

On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:14 PM, Christophe Teyssier <chris@...> wrote:
> Le Wednesday 12 March 2008 21:06:44, vous avez écrit :
>
> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Christophe Teyssier <chris@...>
>  wrote:
>
> > >  Wouldn't it make sense to use cmake for our Qt build? The big advantage
>  > > being that is produces native project/make files on all target platforms.
>  >
>  > But qmake is already doing this for the Qt build, right? Pardon my
>  > naivete regarding cmake.
>
>  Maybe I'm the one being naive here, I thought the ability to produce VS
>  project files was only available in the commercial edition of Qt?

No, it's available on the free version of Qt 4.3.3 as well. That's how
I've been building Celestia-qt4: run qmake celestia.pro, then load the
project file into MS Visual Studio 2008 EE. Fridger got this working
for VS2003 and posted the instructions on the forum; it works just
fine with 2005 EE as well. I'm actually quite fond of the VS2008
EE--the Intellisense stuff is extremely convenient.

--Chris

Christophe Teyssier wrote:
> I still build with the nmake makefiles using VC++ Toolkit 2003 and the MS 
> Platform SDK.
> 
> It was hell to setup, but I should probably upgrade to VS2005 EE.
> 
So do I. No problems.

F.

Le Wednesday 12 March 2008 21:06:44, vous avez écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Christophe Teyssier <chris@...> 
wrote:
> >  Wouldn't it make sense to use cmake for our Qt build? The big advantage
> > being that is produces native project/make files on all target platforms.
>
> But qmake is already doing this for the Qt build, right? Pardon my
> naivete regarding cmake.

Maybe I'm the one being naive here, I thought the ability to produce VS 
project files was only available in the commercial edition of Qt?

-- 
Christophe

Christophe Teyssier wrote:
> Le Wednesday 12 March 2008 21:06:44, vous avez écrit :
>> On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Christophe Teyssier <chris@...> 
> wrote:
>>>  Wouldn't it make sense to use cmake for our Qt build? The big advantage
>>> being that is produces native project/make files on all target platforms.
>> But qmake is already doing this for the Qt build, right? Pardon my
>> naivete regarding cmake.
> 
> Maybe I'm the one being naive here, I thought the ability to produce VS 
> project files was only available in the commercial edition of Qt?

I don't know about generating VS project files.

I positively hate cmake, but I understand it might be needed if we ever 
move to KDE4 anyway. I notice the admin/ directory is definitely not in 
KDE SVN anymore.

It is, also, yet-another-external-build-dependency.

Having recently built KDE4 by hand, I don't see any advantage to cmake. 
You still get a "configure" stage, a directory full of (even more) 
cryptic macros, and a real pain-in-the-ass if something goes wrong. The 
only feature I like about it is that it can show progress as a 
percentage; not terribly relevant on a project the size of Celestia.

--Pat