[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?
From: |
Richard Frith-Macdonald |
Subject: |
Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep? |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Dec 2013 06:34:55 +0000 |
On 29 Dec 2013, at 19:17, Markus Hitter <address@hidden> wrote:
> Am 29.12.2013 19:47, schrieb David Chisnall:
>> I'd be more inclined to move to CMake, which has the advantage of not being
>> a complete usability disaster and being able to generate XCode projects.
>
> While I have no experience with CMake, I wouldn't mind either.
I have some little experience with CMake now ... it's a replacement for
autoconf and automake (which are pretty horrible), unfortunately it's a cure
which is worse than the disease.
When it works, it's fine, but just like autoconf/automake, when it doesn't work
or when you want to do something that hasn't been catered for, it's a nightmare
and takes hours and hours to work out how things operate.
> I just see my shiny new Debian packages don't allow me to build -base
> without debian/rules.
I'm not sure what that means, but it sounds like a Debain packaging issue
orthogonal to any issues in autoconf.
> configure insists to run on a normal make and
> falls back to the non-fhs layout.
I think you are talking about the case where the software hasn't been
configured; you type make, and the configure script is automatically run.
That's nothing directly to do with either autoconf or gnustep-make. Rather
it's a deliberate feature provided by the makefiles of many (most?) projects
... if you try to build a project without having run the configure script since
it was last modified, there's a makefile rule to run configure for the project
(keeping any existing selected options) on your behalf (another common thing
for makefiles to do is print an error message saying you haven't configured the
project, and then bomb out).
When you fist build a project, you are expected to run the configure script
before building (with cmake, you do the same thing and run cmake before
building) specifying the options you want (like the debian/fhs layout).
> The whole testsuite ignores
> messages=yes,
The testsuite doesn't have a 'messages=yes' option... that's a gnustep-make
option, not a test framework option.
The test framework is a few header files and shell scripts and some
documentation/examples, packaged as an add-on to be installed with gnustep-make
so it's available anywhere you might build software using gnustep-make. It's
driven by the gnustep-tests shellscript/command (so it doesn't accept any make
arguments) not a make file.
Each testsuite is then a hierarchy of directories containing code fragments to
be built/executed to perform tests, and a files to mark which directories
actually contain test code.
The gnustep-tests script runs the testsuite; when building a testcase from a
fragment of source code, the script may generate a makefile to do the building,
and you could then manually use that makefile supplying 'messages=yes' as an
argument, but such a makefile would be so simple that it's hard to see the
point.
> apparently all the checks fail silently. Building a single
> one doesn't work either, "Testing.h" not found.
That sounds lke you don't have gnustep-make and/or the testute installed? Or
don't have it installed in your PATH?
Given that you implied above that you didn't configure gnustep-base to use the
debian filesystem layout, I expect things are installed in the gnustep layout,
so I'm further guessing that you didn't set up your environment to point to the
gnustep installation (sourcing GNUstep.sh is the standard way to do that), and
your problem most likelyh is that the gnustep-tests script can't find things,
though I'd be interested in how/where you run gnustep-tests in that case.
> Have yet to investigate
> what actually happens, but it's obvious GNUstep Make isn't exactly
> bullet-proof.
I'm sure it's not ... but none of this sounds like gnustep-make issues.
It does sound somewhat indirectly related to autoconf, in as much as it sounds
like the problem is due to failure to configure, install, and set up the
environment, but hard to say for sure.
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, (continued)
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, David Chisnall, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Markus Hitter, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, David Chisnall, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Markus Hitter, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Fred Kiefer, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Markus Hitter, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Richard Frith-Macdonald, 2013/12/30
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, David Chisnall, 2013/12/30
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Markus Hitter, 2013/12/30
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Markus Hitter, 2013/12/30
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?,
Richard Frith-Macdonald <=
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Markus Hitter, 2013/12/30
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Riccardo Mottola, 2013/12/30
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Frank Rehwinkel, 2013/12/29
- Re: Cross-compiling GNUstep?, Ivan Vučica, 2013/12/29