Some more MSVC fixes
Dimitrie O. Paun
dimi at cs.toronto.edu
Wed Feb 6 14:31:23 CST 2002
On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Francois Gouget wrote:
> There are subtle differences between how the Unix makefiles work and
> how the Windows makefiles work.
Yes, but I suggested using cygwin, which comes with GNU make, which is
quite compatible with the one on Unix, because... it's the same one! :)
Really, some time ago I tried to port Wine to cygwin, and I had no
problems whatsoever with the make system. This is a red herring.
> In addition to that the MSVC compiler
> supports different options, etc.
Right. But's that's why we have configure.
> Using the cygwin make tool (i guess they provide one)
Read about cygwin here: http://www.cygwin.com (I think...)
It is a Unix emulation layer build on top of Win32. It is Wine^-1 :)
As such, it come with the same, unmodified utils familliar to Linux users.
> could help but it would not solve the compiler option problem.
That's trivial to solve, come on...
> Plus cygwin works in a world where all paths are Unix paths
> while the MSVC compiler expects you to use drive letters (but will
> happily accept '/'s).
If it accepts '/'s, what's the problem? Where (and why) would you use
drive letters??? We only deal with relative paths to Wine's root...
> In any case you would most likely end up rewriting
> the makefiles and this would as much work as just generating brand new
> .dsp files.
I strongly disagree, but since I don't have VC to show you... :)
> But you would have to run configure on Windows, no? Since configure
> is a shell script this means you need something like cygwin to compile
> the source :-/ Or did you mean to run configure on Unix to generate just
> the right Makefiles for use on Windows?
No, you have bash in cygwin. It will work just fine.
More information about the wine-devel