From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22204 invoked by alias); 15 Sep 2003 18:39:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 22197 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2003 18:39:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO garm.central.cmich.local) (141.209.15.48) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 15 Sep 2003 18:39:16 -0000 Received: from leon.phy.cmich.edu ([141.209.165.20]) by egate1.central.cmich.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:39:10 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by leon.phy.cmich.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69E5F70011; Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:39:05 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 19:38:00 -0000 From: Eric McDonald To: Hans Ronne Cc: xconq7@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Tcl/Tk Interface Unification In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Sep 2003 18:39:10.0144 (UTC) FILETIME=[A6EFD400:01C37BB8] X-SW-Source: 2003/txt/msg00418.txt.bz2 On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Hans Ronne wrote: > I see your point. I think we can have the best of both ways. Agreed. I guess I wasn't clear. I definitely would not rip out the existing targets for specific interfaces in the top-level Makefile. I envision something like UI_TARGET = @UI_TARGET@ all: $(UI_TARGET) tkconq: ... xtconq: ... sdlconq: ... cconq: ... >Second, we enable building of all targets by name, This is essentially done, except for sdlconq (as you noted), and perhaps the tcltk target should be tkconq rather than all-xconq and all-wconq, since we are trying to remove the notion of platform from the build process. And this brings up another issue: what should executables be named? Currently, things are set up so that both the X11 SDL and Tcl/Tk executables get named xconq, and the Windows SDL and Tcl/Tk executables get named wconq.exe. In retrospect, perhaps I should have set them up to be named sdlconq[.exe] and tkconq[.exe] without regard to platform. This would be more in line with cconq. What do you think? > would build sdlconq without any extra configurations. It was the need to > add --enable-sdl every time you run ./configure that I wanted to get rid > of. I don't know how many times I forgot to do that and ended up not being > able to build sdlconq. I've done it a few times myself. I also want to see the need for enable-sdl go away. That is part of the configury "polish" I was referring to. I will work on this as part of my next pass through the configuration/build system, now that the major surgery has been done. Thanks, Eric