Re: [Sc2-devel] Mac OS X status

[<sj...@de...>]

Max Horn wrote:
> At 11:25 Uhr -0500 22.12.2002, Peter Berger wrote:
> >-Like everyone else, I found all the multiply defined symbols.  I 
> >did some massive subst-ing, and sent the patch to MeepEep.
> >-I've gotten a working uqm binary by building from the command line 
> >against the -l versions of the SDL libraries.
> >-My attempts so far to get a projectbuilder app have been met with 
> >failure at the link phase -- but part of that might be my 
> >inexperience with PB.
> >
> >I think a great stretch goal for 0.2 would be to have a working PB 
> >file included with the release.
> 
> Personally,  I see no value in a PB file at all <shrug>. I guess it's 
> really up to personal preference, whether you like to use PB or not 
> (for me it's just too damn outright sluggish).

The ultimate value of having a PB build is that it works nicely to
produce a full bundle of the application, whereas with a build using
gcc, you have to do that manually. The way I'd like to see it is
SC2 being released as a .app (tarred and gzipped, or maybe a .dmg --
which way doesn't really matter), holding the binary, the contents,
etc., etc., etc.

That would probably involve a fair amount of code patching, though.

There's also the advantage that if somebody wants to get involved,
but they're not familiar with the Unix command line, they don't have
to learn the arcana of tcsh et al.

*shrugs* I'm happy with the Unix command line, so I'll be not worrying
too much about getting it working with PB. It's kinda like "I'll worry
about that when everything else is working properly." :)