How did you come to the conclusion that C::B requires a monolithic wx lib? :shock:
<Linker>
<Add library="wxmsw26"/>
<Add directory="sdk\tinyxml"/>
<Add directory="$(WX_DIR)\lib\gcc_dll\msw"/>
<Add directory="$(WX_DIR)\lib\gcc_dll$(WX_CFG)"/>
</Linker>
<Linker>
<Add library="wxbase26"/>
<Add library="wxmsw_adv"/>
<Add library="wxmsw_core"/>
...
</Linker>
That's right. It's that way because it is the least painful way.
If you absolutely don't want monolithic, you can of course compile it differently, too. All you need to do is modify a few link libraries and a compiler flag.
Probably (I haven't tried that, but why shouldn't it work...) you can make a static build, too, if you like.
To me, the linux build is *much* easier than the windows one...
So I'm thinking if we can do a simple "configure"-like system, to achieve something simmilar to what is in Windows.Why though? It works fine the way it is, there's no benefit in changing it. The more complex and non-standard you make it, the more likely you make an error.
Perhaps some AngelScript here and there, embedded (or not) in the Project files.
You don't have to use a monolithic wx lib. When I wrote the instructions at the wiki, wx2.6 wasn't even standard in distros so I just used the windows-build-howto as a starting point.
The thing is that in linux wx-config is used, so no matter how you compile it, it will still work correctly.
The only place we "force" you to use a monolithic wx build is the project file. But nothing's stopping you from changing it to use a non-monolithic version.
Finally, I don't understand why people think that *I* make it hard to build C::B in linux :shock:.
I 've put every effort to make the process as easy as in windows, at least. To me, the linux build is *much* easier than the windows one...
Good news : while I am posting C::B is compiling on my Mandriva 2006.
My error was to follow the wiki.
I have just added wxWidgets rpm for my distrib instead of building a new one as indicated and
after bootstrap, ./configure, make.
So indeed C::B compiles fine with any version.
My mistakeYou don't have to use a monolithic wx lib. When I wrote the instructions at the wiki, wx2.6 wasn't even standard in distros so I just used the windows-build-howto as a starting point.
The thing is that in linux wx-config is used, so no matter how you compile it, it will still work correctly.
The only place we "force" you to use a monolithic wx build is the project file. But nothing's stopping you from changing it to use a non-monolithic version.
Finally, I don't understand why people think that *I* make it hard to build C::B in linux :shock:.
I 've put every effort to make the process as easy as in windows, at least. To me, the linux build is *much* easier than the windows one...
Why though? It works fine the way it is, there's no benefit in changing it. The more complex and non-standard you make it, the more likely you make an error.
That's right. It's that way because it is the least painful way.
WXVER_MAJOR=2
WXVER_MINOR=6
WXVER_RELEASE=2
BUILD=release
MONOLITHIC=1
SHARED=1
UNICODE=1
WXUNIV=0
CFG=
VENDOR=cb
OFFICIAL_BUILD=0
DEBUG_FLAG=default
DEBUG_INFO=default
RUNTIME_LIBS=dynamic
MSLU=1
USE_EXCEPTIONS=1
USE_THREADS=1
USE_GUI=1
USE_HTML=1
USE_ODBC=0
USE_OPENGL=0
USE_QA=1
COMPILER=gcc
CC=gcc
CXX=g++
CFLAGS=
CPPFLAGS=
CXXFLAGS=
LDFLAGS=