[OGo-GNUstep-Port] Re: Patches

[Helge Hess]

On Freitag, 18. Juli 2003, at 17:50 Uhr, Nicola Pero wrote:
> GNUSTEP really means *-gnu-gnu, while GNUSTEP_BASE_LIBRARY means  
> *-gnu-*.

OK.

> You can use GNUSTEP_BASE_LIBRARY and forget about GNUSTEP if you think
> it's the only name which makes sense of the two.

In the case of OGo it's obviously the one and only correct selection  
since OGo code only cares about Foundation. And #ifdef GNUSTEP would  
imply a dependency on gui, which it has not.
I also like the consistency in the naming (XXX_Foundation_LIBRARY).

> In that case, please remove any GNUSTEP define in your code to avoid
> conflicts with the other usage.

Can anyone provide a patch for that ? Is it really used somewhere ?

Actually I think it isn't used anywhere, but I'm not sure.

>> In any case GNUSTEP_BASE_LIBRARY is what was *meant* in the source  
>> code
>> (since the section is gstep-base specific) and should be used.
> Ok.  That's fine then.

Yup :-) Didn't want to be offend, just wanted to point out how we do  
things, after all this is not a GNUstep project ;-)

>> In other words: patches should use GNUSTEP_BASE_LIBRARY for denoting
>> base-library specific sections (just like we use  
>> LIB_FOUNDATION_LIBRARY
>> and APPLE_FOUNDATION_LIBRARY, case may differ).
>
> Ok.  I'm absolutely happy with that.  APPLE_FOUNDATION_LIBRARY is not
> currently defined in gnustep-make, but we can add it (I'd like the
> #defines used in OGo, and the ones generally #defined by gnustep-make  
> and
> which everyone else is using, to match).

I currently mix up NeXT_Foundation_LIBRARY and APPLE_Foundation_LIBRARY  
all over the code. It does mean the same to OGo source code :-(
Anyone willing to provide a patch for that ?

Actually I think we use COCOA_Foundation_LIBRARY, not APPLE. I don't  
know, someone just needs to clear that up and send a patch. Didn't say  
that MacOSX port is ready, said that it needs quite some work ;-)

>> I guess GNUSTEP is used instead of something like
>> GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES_ACTIVE, but I don't see the point of it anyway then.
>>
>> I think we need to distinguish two things:
>> a) is gstep-make used for compilation or not
>> b) is gstep-make used at runtime or not (eg use env for resource  
>> lookup)
>
> How important is it to know inside the Objective-C source code if
> gnustep-make is used or not ?  If it is, maybe gnustep-make should  
> #define
> something itself to let code know it's being used to compile.

Good question. I think it definitely needs to know whether it is  
compiled *for* a GNUstep environment (I suggested to split GNUstep-make  
into GNUstep-env and -make long time ago :-( ), so that we know whether  
we should consider the GNUSTEP_XXX variables.

>> (didn't found a previous post of you, sorry ;-)
> http://mail.opengroupware.org/pipermail/gnustep-port/2003-July/ 
> 000002.html

Ah, OK.

Well, this contains some errors (which you corrected above) and you  
should document the exact meanings of the define somewhere, eg:
---snip---
The theory is that GNUSTEP is a GNUstep specific #define, and is  
#defined
by gnustep-base to let the code know that gnustep-base is being used
(check core/base/base.make).  Which makes sense after all.
---snap---
As we all know now, it specifies a gnustep-base + gnustep-gui (and  
should be defined by gnustep-make, since gnustep-base can't know  
whether it's used with gnustep-gui.

I think we can stay with NeXT_Foundation_LIBRARY.

best regards,
   Helge
-- 
OpenGroupware.org	- http://www.opengroupware.org/