Hi Przemek, Okay, let's leave them there, that's why I was asking. However I'd like to make some changes here to move their solution closer to the standard we use in Harbour. Particularly the inclusion logic and some misc GT settings, and specifically to move GTSLN/GTCRS specific logic to their respective Makefiles, instead of being scattered around in scripts and multiple Makefiles in the tree. Without losing functionality of course.
[ On Linux I can test, so it's not blind modification nor something I've haven't done before, in case this wasn't obvious from my activity here and the binary builds I've so far produced for *nix systems (for Lorenzo). ] Brgds, Viktor On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Przemyslaw Czerpak <dru...@acn.waw.pl>wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Szak�ts Viktor wrote: > > Hi Viktor, > > > > After rechecking the situation with gtcrs, gtsln, > > I'd like to ask group whether we could move > > these two GTs to the contrib area. > > The reasons are: > > 1) Dependency on optional external libs, > > with the same issues our contribs have to deal with, > > but managed by other means, special > > switches and envvars all deepely embedded > > into the make system. Most of this could > > be easily standardized if these would be > > *curses and/or slang are default part of *nix systems. > > > simple contribs. > > 2) Both seems to be superseded by gttrm. > > It's not true, never was and never be as long as we do not > add full support for termcap/terminfo to GTTRM and because > the system functions to manage this database are usually part > of curses or slang then there is no solution to implement it > in portable way without references to these libraries. > > > [ We can also apply the methods used for > > contribs in their current location, and I plan > > to do this to clean these obscure parts of > > the make system. hbmk would also > > integrate much better if these two wouldn't > > be such exceptions as they currently are. ] > > What do you think? > > I think that nothing has changed from the time you asked about it last > time. > Both using basic screen libraries in *nixes and still are the only > one really portable solution which can be used. > Asking about it *nix users is the same as asking windows users about > moving GTWVT or GTWIN to contrib because both need some extertnal > .dlls which are part of windows system just like curses or slang > are part of *nix system. > > best regards, > Przemek > _______________________________________________ > Harbour mailing list > Harbour@harbour-project.org > http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour >
_______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
