r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3 Extensions] REBOL 3 Extensions discussions

Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[854]
CMake Input is a "CMakeLists.txt" file, which is written in "just 
another Makefile language".
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[855]
Yes, but the ARM make tool looked like 1982 the last time I tried 
it.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[856]
No idea what you tried, but you'd typically just use GNU make on 
ARM as well.
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[857]
Have you tried using the makefile on BSD or OSX?
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[858]
No, as there is no hostkit release for either of those.
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[859]
Basically, same as Linux right now.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[860x2]
Can't sensibly try without e.g. a OSX dylib.
But I prodded you for weeks to build one :)
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[862x2]
Also, problematic builds are Sun and HP Unix. But, anyway, if people 
are willing to add them, it's ok with me.
Right... I remember that now. We'll have to give it another go.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[864]
I guess sticking with the big three (+ BSD, maybe) will be sufficient 
for now.
AdrianS
12-Jul-2010
[865]
here's the CMakeLists.txt from the OpenCV project , as an example:


https://code.ros.org/svn/opencv/tags/latest_tested_snapshot/opencv/CMakeLists.txt
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[866x2]
In my opinion, there are bigger problems to tackle before spreading 
thin over multiple platforms makes sense.
(Eventing, for example)
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[868]
Yes, of course, but if more developers get involved, the work does 
not need to be sequential.
Graham
12-Jul-2010
[869]
Oh yeah ..let's get an Os/2 build too !
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[870]
Hmmm.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[871]
http://bolka.at/2010/rebol3/CMakeLists.txt.html
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[872]
Looking at above link, I don't think cmake provides much benefit 
to us.
Graham
12-Jul-2010
[873]
( the current version of Os/2 is ecomworkstation  and is positioned 
as a secure enterprise client environemnt )
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[874x2]
Here's the CMake buildfile I use for the A96 hostkit
CMake provides the benefit that we don't have to reinvent the wheel 
for now. It has, for example, a nice installer for Win32 and can 
automatically generate Visual Studio project files from the above.
AdrianS
12-Jul-2010
[876]
well, if you are considering a makefile generator, at least cmake 
is somewhat of a standard
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[877]
Installer? What does it install?
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[878x3]
cmake.exe
CMake takes the above as input and generates e.g. a Makefile as output.
Taking specifics of the actual build environment into account.
Carl
12-Jul-2010
[881]
The method I use for R3 simply uses REBOL to generate the host-kit, 
the makefile, and other related files at the same time.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[882x2]
With CMake the workflow of a user who wants to build the hostkit 
on Win32 would be as follows:
- Download and install a toolchain (e.g. MingW or MSVC)
- Download and install CMake
- Download the R3 Hostkit

- Generate a R3 build script for your preferred toolchain using CMake. 
E.g. use CMake to generate a GNU make Makefile for MingW
- Build the R3 Hostkit (using the generated build script)
Without CMake, those steps would be the same, except for the extra 
installation of CMake and the generation of a local build script. 
But it would also either limit the user to a single toolchain (such 
as MingW, currently) or you would need to replicate some of the functionality 
of CMake in your make-build.r
AdrianS
12-Jul-2010
[884]
there's a GUI front end for cmake too, though I guess one could be 
made for REBOL just as easily - this lets you resolve env var issues 
and other things
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[885]
Further, at least for the A96 hostkit, Linux and Win32 hostkits are 
completely separate packages, and that's an incredible nuisance for 
someone doing cross-platform work.
Edgar
12-Jul-2010
[886x2]
It built for me just fine but I had to modify the makefile to use 
cp lib\r3lib.dll .
instead of 
copy lib\r3lib.dll . 
inside a mingw cmd window.
Do we have a test files to run to check if all areas of R3 that is 
implemented is working?
Graham
12-Jul-2010
[888]
It would be good if we had access to the test suites
Edgar
12-Jul-2010
[889]
After adding MinGW\bin and msys\1.0\bin to the windows command path 
and also copying rebol.exe to msys\1.0\bin folder, I was able to 
build it from a normal command window without modifying the makefile.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[890]
Carl: in any case, I don't care much about CMake. Just shipping the 
hostkit with your make-build.r instead of a pre-built makefile would 
most likely do just fine for getting an integrated cross-platrform 
build working. (Plus, of course, bundling the libraries and sources 
for all platforms in the hostkit.)
Edgar
12-Jul-2010
[891]
I see go.r can be use as test.
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[892]
And just in case: _THANKS_ a million for the new hostkit code drop, 
Carl (and everyone else who helped make it happen)!
Graham
12-Jul-2010
[893]
echo that
Maxim
12-Jul-2010
[894]
yes thanks to everyone who worked on making it happen.  :-)
Graham
12-Jul-2010
[895]
we now have a domain ( thanks Andreas ) for the tracker http://jira.rebolsource.net:8080/secure/Dashboard.jspa
Andreas
12-Jul-2010
[896]
and now is probably as good a time as any to move this discussion 
to !REBOL3 Host Kit
NickA
13-Jul-2010
[897]
+1 Thank you!
Pekr
13-Jul-2010
[898]
Apart from Win, OS-X, Linux, BSD, the next most important platform 
is really imo an ARM plus Android.
Graham
13-Jul-2010
[899x2]
Put Arm before BSD
BSD is well serviced by R2
NickA
13-Jul-2010
[901]
I agree - for R3 to gain traction, mobile support should be a priority.
Robert
13-Jul-2010
[902x2]
Jira: Why a new tracker? Isn't CureCode still be used? No information 
fragmentation please.
Priorities: Before getting new platforms up & running I see feature 
completion to be more critical. Otherwise we have a moving target 
that takes to much effort to keep in sync.