[Pkg-ace-devel] RE: Simplified GUI support in ACE/TAO

[Johnny Willemsen]

Hi Marek

>     TAO VERSION: 1.4.4 (cvs 20050306)
>     ACE VERSION: 5.4.4 (cvs 20050306)
>  
>     AREA/CLASS/EXAMPLE AFFECTED:
>     GUI support
>     DOES THE PROBLEM AFFECT:
>        COMPILATION? yes (in some sense :-) )
> 
> Hi,
> 
>     I modified some defaults to decrease the number of switches
> necessary to support GUI in ACE and TAO
> (see ACE-INSTALL.html for more detail info, please). Currently there
> are four switches to control
> compilation, namely qt, fl, tk and xt.
> 
> Briefly:
> mwc.pl -features qt=1,fl=1,tk=1,xt=1 generates build files for GUI
> support in ACE and TAO,
> while
> make qt=1 fl=1 tk=1 xt=1 compiles GUI support.

A question, when we add qt=1, fl=1, tk=1 and xt=1 to the default.features
file we use in the release process when generating the gnu makefiles, then
this is safe to do? When someone then want to build he/she has to set
qt,fl,tk,xt on the commandline or in their platform_macros.GNU?

Johnny

> 
> Nevertheless, I did not removed all those features which were required
> previously, namely
> x11, gl, ace_qtreactor, ace_xtreactor, ace_flreactor, ace_tkreactor,
> tao_qtresource,
> tao_tkresource, tao_xtresource,  tao_flresource. They are still
> recognized, hence once may gain
> a better control on generation/compilation if necessary.
> 
> I do not expect that these changes affect in some way
> autoconf/automake, but it would to be wise to check
> if ac/am still works as needed :-)
> 
> BTW. The relation between MPC features and makefile variables is more
> and more obfuscated.
> I understand the reason, namely possibility to compile ACE using
> Makefiles only without MPC generation.
> Nevertheless I sense some problems with this scheme when the number of
> external, optional libraries
> for ACE will grow.
> 
> 
> Your comments are welcome
> 
> Marek Brudka
>