Hi Viktor,
[...]
One drawback which was mentioned on the list, is that we
have a different license for the compiler lib, the RTL
libs and pbly also PCRE.
O s... ;-), I completly forgot about. But it means that
we have problem with .dll (.so) builds also, haven't we ?
> We also have some mutually exclusive libs.
Also, since GTs and RDDs are "plugin" type of libs, I wouldn't mix
them either in the global one. So, we might end up with a few
separate libs at the end.
Actually - if I see this correctly - the latest changes in
the GNU make system have the benefit that it seems now much
easier to generate one global lib (Thanks a lot to
Ryszard for this work), than it would have been before.
Yes, I appreciate Ryszard's contribution very much. And yours,
and Przemek's, and all others :).
Having so many libs has nothing to do with any decisions
in the past, it was just how the project evolved, and some
new modules where simply put into new dirs (which is
perfectly okey) and all these automatically got separate libs.
This is a possible simplified lib layout:
- harbour (hbcpage + hbcommon + hbdebug + hblang + hbmacro + hbpp +
hbrdd + hbrtl + hbvm + hbrddusr + hbsix + hbhsx)
- hbcomp
- hbpcre
- gt*
- rdd*
- hbmain*
- hbnulrdd
This was already mentioned on the list not long ago, and
there was not too many reactions to it.
That's a proposition which seems resonable, but let's discuss
it after the release :).
--
Marek
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Zmus swojego faceta, zeby to przeczytal
Kliknij >>> http://link.interia.pl/f1ceb
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
