Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options (fwd)

2001-06-25 Thread Daniel Glassey
There's also the patch I sent way back in January that was autoconf only (no changes needed to the makefiles) - it's needed for it to build on other debian architectures. Once I've made the debian package for 1.5.2 I'll post the new patch. Note, it requires practically NO changes except for a

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options (fwd)

2001-06-25 Thread Troy A. Griffitts
I have a really good autoconf/automake system for sword that was submitted a while back from Edward Maros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. I'm hoping to get it integrated in 1.7. Stable 1.6 should be release in a few months. We need to release with these new features if every one of our frontends already d

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options (fwd)

2001-06-24 Thread Martin Gruner
Hi Nic, > UNAME_ARCH = `uname -m` > UNAME_CPU = ${UNAME_ARCH} > > under the "#compiler" section in the Makefile.cfg > and changed the intel check from -m486 to be: > > ifeq ($(system),intel) > CFLAGS += -mcpu=${UNAME_CPU} -march=${UNAME_ARCH} > endif > > NOW, I've only tested this under Mandrak

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options (fwd)

2001-06-19 Thread nic
[following up on some compile options] hi there all... :) > A great idea. Are you familiar with the automake / autoconf tools? > If yes, why don't you go ahead and create the necessary files? > This upgrade would greatly increase the usability of sword. hmmm, just had a quick look (I'm not fa

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options

2001-06-14 Thread Martin Gruner
> how about having configure scripts so that if ppl compile it themselves, > it will compile for their cpu/s, otherwise set -march=i386 (lowest common > denominator)... A great idea. Are you familiar with the automake / autoconf tools? If yes, why don't you go ahead and create the necessary files

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options

2001-06-14 Thread dtrotzjr
> A question while I'm here -- has anyone ever tried to get sword running > under WINE on a *nix box? or using the WINE libraries or anything like > that? I haven't actually had much to do with WINE for about 2 years, and > so can't quite remember what you can do with WINE, but I was thinking th

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options

2001-06-13 Thread nic
> > Using -march=i586 and > > -mcpu=i686 like the Mandrake distribution would offer even higher performance > > at the cost of allowing only Pentium and newer processors to run the sword > > library. > > And against that one. If i ran Mandrake, 2 of my 4 PCs wouldn't work! :-) how about having

Re: [sword-devel] Compile Options

2001-06-13 Thread Paul Gear
Luke Mauldin wrote: > ... > It > is my suggestion that the -m486 option be removed and -march=i386 -mcpu=i686 > added. This will allow all processors from a 386 up to use sword but it > optimizes sword for a 686 processor. These are the default compile values > that most Linux distributions use