Re: [opendemo-devel] combined Makefile

[Dr. U. G. <Uwe...@ph...>]

Hello!

> > > The next step is to generate the DOS batch files also with this
> > > Makefile.
> > I'm not so sure any more, if this is such a good idea.
> Why is that?
Because I'm lazy. If you look at my Makefile implementation, you'll see,
that I let make alone figure out, where the soure files are located.
Some .o (or .asm) files will be derived from the source .c file in the
corresponding directory but sometimes also from the library or game
directory. I simply provided make with all possible rules and it will find,
where the source file comes from. If I intend to create a batch file for
compilation, I have to repeat this process (looking for the file) myself.
OK,
if [ -e $dir1/$file ]; then
	use $dir1/$file
else
	if [ -e $dir2/$file ]; then
		use $dir2/$file
	fi
fi
it is not too difficult.

> > > Another thing is to finally implement a working 'make debug'.
> > I just did that. I added the debugging shared library to the binary
> > package, which is now 1974628 bytes long. Shouldn't we better generate a
> > separate 'debugging' package?
> I don't think we need to include native libaries in the packages at all. I
> figure that end users would want qvm files, and developers would like to
> make debug builds for testing purposes. Since developers should be able to
> compile everything from source, who needs a debug binary that someone else
> built?
That's right. The debugging libraries even contain full path names of the
source files and nobody else has the source files in 
/home/uwe/mi/new/opendemo/src/q3a/...

> > > The last thing I'm thinking about is to compile the Win32 shared
> > > libraries with a Linux cross-compiler too.
> > This is now really easy to add, maybe next weekend.
> Is this necessary either (see above)?
You're right, lets dump native libraries in binary packages totally and
I can finally concentrate myself on the contents (XML DTD and/or Scheme
writing, XSLT converter to manipulate od files etc.) itself.

Bye, Uwe