|
From: | Christoph |
Subject: | Re: Next pretest, and branching plans |
Date: | Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:29:17 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 |
On 3/14/2010 11:55 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
This assumes that libXpm.dll is actually somwhere on the PATH, which it might or might not be (and I might not put it on the path). I think the command line option for configure.bat is way more flexible for one's individual build environment, plus who knows, maybe I want to also package libSvg.dll or libWhatever.dll. Now I can do this without having to change the code.Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:50:30 -0700 From: Christoph<address@hidden> Cc: Stefan Monnier<address@hidden>, address@hidden - added an option "--distfiles [path to file, for example libXpm.dll]" to configure.bat.That's gratuitous, I think: modern Windows shells are powerful enough to let you write a FOR loop looking for libXpm.dll along PATH.
Also, is there any way to get the version number from a file contained in the source tar ball? Then make dist would always output a zip file properly named according to the current version.Again, one of the variants of the FOR command should do the trick.
Could you elaborate on this solution? Thanks! ChristophPS: As for the "powerful Windows shells"...not before Windows 7 (or Vista?) with Powershell did Windows ever have a powerful shell... ;)
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |