Re: Windows make files

[Ben Hyde <bh...@pobox.com>]

Ok, I've changed my mind.  Reading Marc's commit
clarifies how very different what I'm doing in
house is from what Apache's doing.  We really
treat the dsp files as second class, and we
don't every emit make files from the IDE.  Our
nmake files are very concise compaired to what
the IDE emits.

To adopt my propose would I think also require
changing to using the most of the power of nmake,
so that changes would be small - not like the
monster that marc just commited.  That's too
much to swallow this late in a release.

I guess we'll live with the current situation,
that unix/NT makefile (et. al.) go out of synch.
That when this happens the group worries the
bone until some kind body steps forward and brings
the lagging half into synch.

What we do in my shop seems to depend on our
automated makefile generator including nmake
under it's wing.

Dean writes:
> If the makefiles are autogenerated why do we even have 
> them checked into CVS?

So the build doesn't ahve to autogenerate them, and so
the instructions for how to build don't have to walk
thru the tedium of describing how to use the IDE in
prose.

It is not possible to manipulate the IDE from the command
line with out using what passes for interapplication
scripting on this platform.  That requires tools, like
visual basic, that many users don't have.  Once you
have them you can really  make the thing dance though.


 - ben h.

Re: Windows make files

[Marc Slemko <ma...@worldgate.com>]

On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Dean Gaudet wrote:

> 
> 
> On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Ben Hyde wrote:
> 
> > Dean writes:
> > > If the makefiles are autogenerated why do we even have 
> > > them checked into CVS?
> > 
> > So the build doesn't ahve to autogenerate them, and so
> > the instructions for how to build don't have to walk
> > thru the tedium of describing how to use the IDE in
> > prose.
> 
> So we're trying to support two build environments.  Automated and babysat. 

No.  Automated (.mak) and damn-must-use-IDE (.dsp). 

eg. if you want to usefully run a debugger, you have to do it from the
IDE.

The point is that it isn't just a matter of wanting to have the .dsp files
to make it easier to use a pretty environment, but rather because you
_have_ to use that environment for far too much.

Re: Windows make files

[Dean Gaudet <dg...@arctic.org>]

On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Ben Hyde wrote:

> Dean writes:
> > If the makefiles are autogenerated why do we even have 
> > them checked into CVS?
> 
> So the build doesn't ahve to autogenerate them, and so
> the instructions for how to build don't have to walk
> thru the tedium of describing how to use the IDE in
> prose.

So we're trying to support two build environments.  Automated and babysat. 

Dean