Re: [RFC: Rewriting of the GNUstep User FAQ, specifically re: Frameworks]

[Matt Rice]

--- Nicola Pero <address@hidden> wrote:
> even if we get "real framework" support under
> GNU/Linux, I would still
> keep the core libraries as libraries on GNU/Linux,

this seems unlikely to happen without some sort of
divine intervention.
why not have them use 'native-library.make'?

> because the "real
> framework" support wouldn't necessarily work on all
> past/future machines,
> will depend on linker support etc.

we should be able to autoconf this..
i should be able to come up with ld.so/ld/binutils
macros to detect "real" frameworks and be able to set 
hacky frameworks or libraries as 'native-libraries'
(instead of being platform based)... 

though base/gui are kindof weird with the header dir
name and the library name being different... 

and other makefiles would need to start using
$(FND_LIBS) $(GUI_LIBS) instead of -lgnustep-gui and
-lgnustep-base when compiling to be usable when
base/gui as frameworks was enabled...

also ADDITIONAL_NATIVE_LIBS is really helpful wrt this
and seems to have been unused in the things using
native-libraries i've looked at (instead using
ifeq's).

anyhow should mention i have base and gui hacked  here
as native-libraries using real frameworks, but no real
improvements to make yet though...

matt

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com