Re: New Build System Requirements

On 02/03/10 15:38, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> I tend to agree that - whatever we will do - we probably won't get rid
> of cygwin. Where we have to get rid of it is the building of the
> "normal" modules.
> 
> As an example, if a developer is going to work on "sw", he might want to
> build sw and all c++ libraries it depends on (well, without the external
> ones). Being able to do that in Visual Studio would be a tremendeous
> achievement. But using Visual Studio as a "launcher" for cygwin shells
> is probably not what we want here. So the build of "normal" C++
> libraries should run inside VS completely.

Not sure what your scenario is where the developer "might want to build 
[just] sw and all c++ libraries it depends on," but doing all of that 
strictly inside VS would not work if any of those C++ libraries in turn 
depended on something not buildable strictly inside VS (e.g., thinking 
of things like flex/bison/idlc/cppumaker/whatever invocations).

-Stephan