I'm starting to build wxWidgets under OSX (knowing I'm new under OSX) and have three specific questions about compiling :
1) Why does "--enable-monolithic" is indicated to be not used with "--disable-shared" in http://wiki.wxwidgets.org/Possible_Conf ... under_OS_X ? Does-it means it's not possible/compatible or is it just an advice (so, an usage rather than a technical impossibility) ? Knowing it's perfectly possible to build a static monolithic library under Windows.
2) Knowing some debug infos are kept in RELEASE build since wxWidgets 2.9.x, does the "--disable-debug_flag" is the same as setting wxDEBUG_LEVEL to 0 in setup.h ? How to set wxDEBUG_LEVEL to 2 from command line (is it "--enable-debug_gdb") ?
3) In http://wiki.wxwidgets.org/Compiling_wxW ... erminal%29, talking about OSX, it's advised to create the build directories directly under the source's root (e.g. "wx/build-release" and "wx/build-debug"), while under Windows, using makefile.gcc, static builds (debug and release, monolithic and no-monolithic, all) with GCC will be created under "wx/lib/gcc_lib". Why this difference of tree sheme ? Why not use a constant one ?
PS : this thread can be considered as a continuation (but more specific, less general) of http://forums.wxwidgets.org/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=36371
Some questions about wxWidgets compiling under OSX Topic is solved
- eranon
- Can't get richer than this
- Posts: 867
- Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 11:42 pm
- Location: France
- Contact:
Some questions about wxWidgets compiling under OSX
[Ind. dev. - wxWidgets 3.0/3.1 under "Win 7 64-bit, TDM64-GCC" + "OS X 10.9, LLVM Clang"]
Re: Some questions about wxWidgets compiling under OSX
1. Some issues have indeed in the past been seen when trying to build static-monolithic, under OSX. However the good news is that monolithic is totally useless when you build static : the very nature of static linking is that you will end up with a single executable containing it all. And wx-config takes care of producinb the right flags. So when you're static, monolithic buys you nothing more
2. I don't know, sorry, maybe someone else can help
3. The difference is that windows is not unix, so the autotools build system that wx uses on unices cannot work there. So different build systems had to be created. Now regarding consistency therer could perhaps be an effort, but I expect the wx devs would argue that making them closer to each other would be significant effort for little gain
2. I don't know, sorry, maybe someone else can help
3. The difference is that windows is not unix, so the autotools build system that wx uses on unices cannot work there. So different build systems had to be created. Now regarding consistency therer could perhaps be an effort, but I expect the wx devs would argue that making them closer to each other would be significant effort for little gain
"Keyboard not detected. Press F1 to continue"
-- Windows
-- Windows