[sword-devel] remove buildtest

[Manfred Bergmann]

Greg.

Am 18.02.2009 um 19:22 schrieb Greg Hellings:

>> The problem is that I don't like MacPorts and I won't install a  
>> second
>> package management system next to Fink.
>> Fink only installs the headers for the Apple supplied ICU (3.6) so  
>> you'll be
>> able to use it for compile.
>>
>> Using a MacPorts version would create a dependency in that someone  
>> needs to
>> install the MacPorts libicu.
>> Static linking is not so easy, if possible at all on Darwin.
>
> I also won't stand for having both package managers installed -- my
> issue was that fink was so far behind release versions, didn't work
> with its attempt to support the installed Apple libraries (e.g.
> libicu) and had almost no package coverage relative to MacPorts that I
> finally just uninstalled it, installed MacPorts and have never looked
> back.  The thing that finally convinced me to change was libicu, to
> tell the truth.  Fink's attempt to provide the headers never resulted
> in a combination of headers/libraries that I could force to work,
> whereas with MacPorts I was able to have a later version of the
> library, have the headers and build against them.

I use the unstable branch of Fink which has quite new packages.
I've tried MacPorts a couple of times actually but always switched  
back to Fink.
In my opinion Fink integrates better into the system and uses system  
libraries for dependencies much better then MacPorts does.

> If you use a .dylib from MacPorts and link against it, can't you just
> add it to your .app bundle and distribute it with the program?  As for
> static linking, I've never had a problem with it -- that's how I was
> able to shoehorn the SWORD binaries into builds of BibleTime that I
> was doing on Mac.  I just disabled shared libraries for SWORD, linked
> against the static libraries with BibleTime and tossed the completed
> binary into the .app bundle.  I never bothered to try the .dylib
> approach, because I didn't want to have to learn how to position that
> at the same time I was learning what a .app folder was at the time,
> but I have seen .dylib files inside of other .app folders before, so
> it ought to be possible.  At the very least, placing the .dylib in the
> app bundle would remove someone being required to install MacPorts (I
> just checked and MacPorts claims that icu has no other dependencies).
> It would increase the download size of your app, but not atrociously
> so.

Yeah, of course you can put libraries into the App bundle. The  
libsword is there, too in the MacSword package.
I'll try to remove buildtest from Makefile.in and if that doesn't work  
I'll see into MacPorts. If ICU has no dependencies then it is not that  
a big problem.


Thanks,
Manfred