[wx-dev] [wxMac] distributable frameworks builds

[Stefan Csomor]

Hi Anders

> > but we still are left with the single dylib pointed to by such a wx
> > symlink, which I'd really like to avoid ...
> 
> Why do you want to avoid the symlink ? If you name it "wx" instead
> of something else, then you'll get conflicts from different ports ?

sorry for not being clear, I wanted to avoid the single lib problem, not
the symlink

> > so we'd have a wx_select command, this could work out, yes ...
> 
> A wx_select command could work. Or you could just re-install the
> framework you want to use and it would overwrite the symlinks ?

yes, but using a wx_select would allow to have it in a make or xcode
project

(..)

> Yeah, but what standard ? Confirming to Mac OS X standards doesn't
> help with cross-platform portability, how do I load a NIB on Linux ?
> If the implementation needs to use such OS things, then so be it, but
> I would like to be able to write against just the wxWidgets
> "platform".
>
> So for the moment it would probably be for the best if the wxWidgets
> implementation did everything in code, without requiring outside
> files ?

for the wx-user you are absolutely right, but for the
wx-port-implementor, it might make things easier
 
> Yeah, it could be nice to have those. Or optionally include GL and
> STC
> too in the monolithic library, that would work for most of my own
> uses
> ;-)
> Or do you plan on making wx.framework into an umbrella framework
> instead ?
> Not sure what that would buy us, can't link against sub-frameworks
> anyway.

I know, but I'm looking at all the options we might have for getting
multiple libs into one framework, so I'll also look at umbrella
frameworks

> BTW; what's the problem with the monolithic lib, besides it being
> larger ?
> (think my Mac OS X 10.4 build of wxWidgets currently weighs in at ~25
> MB)

nothing, but I'd still not make it contain just everything, but have a
way for 'contribs' as well

Thanks,

Stefan