Chris Frey wrote:
>
> it's always a huge relief to see VC++ project files available, since it
> indicates somebody has already been down that path before.
I could see that view if we were shipping generic Makefiles...back
before autotools, most open source projects had just a single Makefile
and you'd have to edit it just to get the thing to build. (Assuming it
would build out of the box at all...) makemake isn't as powerful as the
autotools, of course, but it's a lot better than the scenario I just
described. Just the fact that the command is "makemake vc" tells you
that someone, somewhere put some thought into the Visual C++ case.
> When you need special build tools,
> a GNU tool chain, or something external, it is often not documented well,
> and there are problems down the line.
If documentation is the only problem, I think I've proven that I can
handle that.
What I _can't_ handle is implementing every little feature people want
using inadequate tools. Here's a challenge for you: someone asked for
separate release and debug binary directories. Implement _that_ using
just a single nmake-compatible Makefile, without duplicating the entire
structure for both cases. I can do it in GNU make no problem.
I don't know if you've noticed, but the latest edition of O'Reilly's
make(1) book is GNU-specific. They no longer even bother covering the
old tools that inspired GNU make. Only the trivial examples in chapter
1 will even run on anything but GNU make.
Face it, GNU make has won. Only question is, who doesn't know it yet?
It's not like I'm suggesting Jam or something like that here...
> Have you ever tried to build mozilla on windows?
So I won't make it difficult, then.
There will always be newbie problems, Chris. We have people here
posting to the list because they don't have the MySQL development files
installed for Bob's sake. There's a point where more help just isn't
helpful to anyone.
> keeping the build process simple.
I can go with that, too, but along with it, you get fewer features. And
that's exactly the source of most of the complaints of makemake.
And no, don't tell me to go back to project files. Won't happen.
They're fine anywhere you have just one tool chain and can mandate a
particular version of it. Beyond that, fuggedaboutit.
Actually, there's one exception. It would be Really Neat (TM) if
someone wrote a tool that would work with autotools to auto-generate
project files for VC++ and such. Could be done. But not by me this week.
