On January 7, 2003 02:25 pm, Francois Gouget wrote:
- winemaker The assumption is that you have a Windows application (complete with
CR/LF), most likely based on Visual C++ and thus with no suitable makefiles. So winemaker's goal is to quickly generate suitable Makefiles that will build Winelib applications/dlls from what it's given and fix the simple issues in the source (CR/LF, #pragmas). The backend is somewhat secondary.
This touches on an issue that I'd like to avoid discussing now -- it deserves a separate thread. But just to note that the things you've mentioned are not mutually exclusive:
-- winemaker has a one-time fixup mode as you mention, for Window specific things that are non portable. This is something good that should stay in winemaker. -- Yes, I agree we want to share more of the build system between Wine and Winelib apps. But my proposal is not counter to this: we should use winegcc in Wine as well. -- Having the make files portable between Wine/Linux/MinGW can only be a good thing, right?
What I'm saying is that winemaker right now generates a lot of the linking/compiling code 'inline' inside the Makefile. All this stuff is now formalized in winegcc/winewrap, so it just makes sense to use those. We avoid duplication, and repeated breakage whenever we change something in the build. It's a win-win IMO.