[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mac OS X

From: Paul F. Kunz
Subject: Re: Mac OS X
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:36:03 -0700

>>>>> On Fri, 18 May 2001 11:34:28 -0600, Tom Tromey <address@hidden> said:

>>>>> "Paul" == Paul F Kunz <address@hidden> writes:
Paul> bundle: rm -rf */*.o c++ -bundle
Paul> -I/System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Headers \ -I.  -o
Paul> libhippoplot.jnilib -framework JavaVM \ jni/*.cxx pattern/*.cxx
Paul> reps/*.cxx src/*.cxx transforms/*.cxx \ functions/*.cxx

> This looks like an ordinary compilation, with unusual flags, to me.
> My question is really why we can't just have the ordinary build pass

   I was just talking with Matt Langston (he's down the hall) and he
made the same suggestion.  If I had access to a machine to test it, I
would give it a try.   

   One thing I could do, to avoid the double compile is to add to the
bundle target...

   (cd hippo; make)
   (cd jni; make )
   rm -rf jni/*.o
   c++ -bundle <etc>

> in these flags.  I'd prefer we not have to add MacOS-specific hacks
> to every Makefile if we can possibly avoid it.

   I'm not askng anybody to do that.  I just posted something that
worked for me in case other automakers run into the same problem.  In
this way it gets into the archived mailing list, so others can see my

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]