On Jul 6, 2006, at 9:48 AM, Ben Fowler wrote:
Since you can do it and I can't, I shall defer to you; but I would like to suggest that any other interested party should also refer to the Apple documentation on Universal Binaries and also on the GNU tools: http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeveloperTools/ Conceptual/cross_development/UniversalBinaries/ chapter_4_section_1.html http://developer.apple.com/unix/crossplatform.html .
My rationale for using the XCode project is that one can specify an SDK, and get a one step build of the Universal Binary. A second advantage is that it is far more friendly to occasional developers, I see it as part of our mission to support Mac users who wish to build their own applications. I appreciate that this is not cut and dried. My picture is that it involves setting up the source files and targets which duplicates information in Makefile.am, but there is not much else to it. I do have such projects, which I also find handy on those occasions when it is necessary to use gdb.
Are you really saying that it could be seen as an unfriendly act to suggest creating a directory MacOSX/ in the svn repository to contain an XCode project and supporting files?
Oh, no not at all! I'm just reminding everyone that there's another platform that is being supported with the current configuration for Mac - the Darwin platform - and that is worth thinking about and retaining support for as the OSX target becomes more Mac-like. It's easy to forget that when you're a Mac guy (and I am) and just think in terms of things getting qualitatively better with native graphics support.
I honestly have not met a lot of people who run the Darwin OS as more than a file server on a home network but if they're out there I'm sure they'd appreciate the consideration.
So before moving the Mac OS X build process to proprietary tools and libs, it's worth considering whether you'd want to leave a target in place for OpenDarwin users that allows them to build Inkscape for a darwin platform using GTK+/X11 and GNU tools.
move == copy and delete ?
No, I meant in addition. Also, isnt that a bit of a negative way of putting it. I am talking about the vendor-supported, native way of building applications, but I repeat, if you feel that my suggestions are 'unfriendly' I will assuredly drop them on the grounds that we don't wish to use, or support others who use, closed source tools.
It's not a matter of ideology for me at all. A hammer is a hammer, there's precedent in the windows port, and I already do my editing in XCode. But there are certainly people for whom it does matter and it's best to keep them in mind and not restrict their options. That's all.
I have had a XCode project for about a year. For some reason I cannot build at all on Tiger at the moment.
I did have a Native GTK+ build of Inkscape around last November, but threw it away when we switched to svn. Since then I have had hardware problems and I am still in the process of re-creating it. I think that the GTK code has improved in reliability over the last 8 months. I am intending to continue with this, and will report any succes that I do have, but an energetic person could easily pip me to the post.
Ben, if you've got xcode projects to start with - even nonworking ones - I'd love to have a copy. I'm in the middle of setting my machine back up to build inkscape from source after removing fink to build libraries (cleanroom mentality). Did/do your project configurations rely entirely on xcode configuration settings? I think it would save me some time to bypass the GNU toolchain at this point, it's sort of a pain getting Makefiles configured correctly.
Thanks for speaking up!
--David