Anders F Björklund afb at algonet.se
Tue Sep 6 10:48:06 PDT 2005

Andras Salamon wrote:

>> Unless I missed something, you can't even *build* the SDL.framework
>> with the autotools/configure - only with the three Xcode projects ?
> Currently that's true.  However, there is no reason this has to be the
> case forever -- after all, Xcode is just a pretty GUI wrapper around
> gcc and friends.

Oh, sure.
Just that's it a little "painful" to build .framework and .app without 
it ?
(setting up the bundle directories, and doing the XML and copying the 

 From what I can tell, it just does a "g++ -dynamiclib" to build the 
With some extra features, of course, the main ones being the versioning:
-compatibility_version 1 -current_version 1
and the installation path, set up to be bundled with an .app it seems:

You would have thought that there would be some _nice_ way of making
OS X frameworks/applications/packages, but *without* using the GUIs ?
(Writing eleventeens line of build scripts for each project, or giving
in and calling "xcodebuild" or "PackageMaker" isn't very nice - IMHO)

> It's just one extra symlink needed in the framework distribution.
> Ultimately, the question is: does the framework add the symlink, or
> the developer?

Since the movement seems to be away from the installer (and 
the SDL.framework bundle will be really really "stupid" it looks like...
At least having the script in the framework will help it not getting 

So the developer will have to add it, but we could give the command ?
sudo ln -s /Library/Frameworks/SDL.frameworks/Commands/sdl-config \

It's very possible that we need more than one libSDLmain.a, as well.
(one Coca with .nib, one Cocoa without .nib, one for Carbon, etc...)
The sdl-config could take parameters and return different ones to use.


More information about the SDL mailing list