search for: prject

...> > > > -Aron > > > > *From:* kamaji@gmail.com [mailto:kamaji@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Keith > Kyzivat > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:00 AM > *To:* Aron Rosenberg > *Cc:* speex-dev@xiph.org > *Subject:* Re: [Speex-dev] [PATCH] Add Visual Studio 2008 Prject files > > > > The VS2005 project files are known to not be up-to-date, so I can > understand that you'd need to fix some things. > Can you verify with an import of the VS2003 project files, that there is > no need for any fixes, and just works after importing? > > Man...

The VS2005 project files are known to not be up-to-date, so I can understand that you'd need to fix some things. Can you verify with an import of the VS2003 project files, that there is no need for any fixes, and just works after importing? Managing multiple project files should be minimized if at all possible. If a straight import of vs2003 project files can be done without any changes

Something to look into perhaps is Trolltech's 'qmake' tool. It fills the role of something like autotools or now defunct imake. As far as I understand, you can indeed use it for projects that don't do anything with the Qt libraries. Now, it may not have the support for multiple targets that it sounds like are needed for speex, and I know it doesn't have as comprehensive of

On 11/29/07, Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > qmake is just insanely limited in terms of the structure of your code > (can't have an executable if you have a library, ...). On top of that, > I've had way too many cases where it just "forgot" to recompile files > when a header file changed (causing strange segfaults) that I'm never

Mikael Magnusson wrote: > Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > ... > > I think the amount of Windows crap is getting a bit ridiculous. It always was. I'm just surprised you took so long to realise it :-). > The autotools files can also be used to build Win32 libraries using > mingw32 (preferably cross-compiling on GNU/Linux). It's currently > possible to build static libs. To

>> Does MinGW require any change to the autoconf files or does it work out >> of the box. > > The changes are very, very minor. One change to configure.ac and > if you want a windows DLL, you need a very minor changes to the > Makefile.am. > > Neither of these changes interfere with Linux/Unix compiles. Can you tell me what these changes are? >> BTW, Windows

John Miles wrote: > What's wrong with a plain old .bat file, or even an NMAKE .mak file? > Ship two files, debug.bat and release.bat, and call it good. > > It is best to leave project-file creation up to individual users, > in my opinion. I second that. When I played around with Speex a while ago, I just dumped the Speex source files into a .dsp file (Visual Studio Project),

Peter Grayson wrote: > On Dec 3, 2007 1:24 PM, Stefan Reuther <streu@gmx.de> wrote: >>The only "problem" is to find out what files are needed for the library >>and which are superfluous (i.e. test/demo programs with their own >>main()). A minimal Makefile would help to document that, and enable >>people create projects, with minimum effort, for all sorts

Keith Kyzivat a ?crit : > Something to look into perhaps is Trolltech's 'qmake' tool. > It fills the role of something like autotools or now defunct imake. I think TrollTech deserves a prize for their accomplishment in making qmake even worse than autotools (I'm using it for something else and wish I wasn't -- Qt itself is fine though). I've heard good things about

>>> I think the amount of Windows crap is getting a bit ridiculous. > > It always was. I'm just surprised you took so long to realise it :-). Well, it's actually getting worse as MS releases new compiler versions... I really haven't been paying attention because I've never compiled it on windows. > For libsndfile, my solution has been : > > - Use MinGW

On 12/3/07, Erik de Castro Lopo <mle+la@mega-nerd.com> wrote: > I just checked and there is nothing needed in configure.ac. > > In the Makefile.am that creates the shared library you need to add > "-no-undefined" to the LDFLAGS variable like this: > > libspeex_la_LDFLAGS = -no-undefined @WHATEVER_WAS_THERE_BEFORE@ Which symbols will it export? I think default

On Dec 3, 2007 1:24 PM, Stefan Reuther <streu@gmx.de> wrote: > John Miles wrote: > > What's wrong with a plain old .bat file, or even an NMAKE .mak file? > > Ship two files, debug.bat and release.bat, and call it good. > > > > It is best to leave project-file creation up to individual users, > > in my opinion. > > I second that. When I played around

On 12/3/07, Stefan Reuther <streu@gmx.de> wrote: > John Miles wrote: > > What's wrong with a plain old .bat file, or even an NMAKE .mak file? > > Ship two files, debug.bat and release.bat, and call it good. > > > > It is best to leave project-file creation up to individual users, > > in my opinion. > > I second that. When I played around with Speex

...les, .dsw, .dsp since that compiler is no longer supported by MS. -Aron From: kamaji@gmail.com [mailto:kamaji@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Keith Kyzivat Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 8:00 AM To: Aron Rosenberg Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] [PATCH] Add Visual Studio 2008 Prject files The VS2005 project files are known to not be up-to-date, so I can understand that you'd need to fix some things. Can you verify with an import of the VS2003 project files, that there is no need for any fixes, and just works after importing? Managing multiple project files should be...

...half-joking... -- john -----Original Message----- From: speex-dev-bounces@xiph.org [mailto:speex-dev-bounces@xiph.org]On Behalf Of Keith Kyzivat Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:26 PM To: Jean-Marc Valin Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] [PATCH] Add Visual Studio 2008 Prject files On 11/29/07, Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: qmake is just insanely limited in terms of the structure of your code (can't have an executable if you have a library, ...). On top of that, I've had way too many cases where it just "forg...

On 11/28/07, Jean-Marc Valin <jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > I think the amount of Windows crap is getting a bit ridiculous. Does > anyone know of a solution to keep things manageable? I mean, the same > autotools files manage the build for Linux PCs, Blackfins and MacOS (and > others). Yet, we need one set of files for each MS compiler version > (good thing they

Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: speex_vs2008.diff Type: application/octet-stream Size: 165590 bytes Desc: speex_vs2008.diff Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20071127/08917736/speex_vs2008-0001.obj

Jean-Marc Valin wrote: ... > I think the amount of Windows crap is getting a bit ridiculous. Does > anyone know of a solution to keep things manageable? I mean, the same > autotools files manage the build for Linux PCs, Blackfins and MacOS (and > others). Yet, we need one set of files for each MS compiler version > (good thing they don't practice "release early, release

Hi I want to submit a bug about auto-dial , but I am not sure on which project the auto-dial comes, how to know about which project , auto-dial comes Thanks Joseph ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

Hello puppet users, I know this is not really a puppet thing but i wanted to know what tools do you use for server provisionning ? I have to build quite a lot of servers for a prject and i need to instal them. Of course puppet take care of the configuration but i wondered if some of you use things like FAI . It seems that i could use puppet to script FAI to install machines. What do you use for provisionning you server ? -- Cordialement, Ghislain _______________________...