[ODE] compiled libs

[Mike Wuetherick]

i've had even less luck trying to figure out CVS in any which way or 
form than i have had trying to compile ODE.

might have just been the sourceforge CVS system though, they seem to go 
out of their way to make it as annoying and confusing as possible.

we use perforce in-house, it's much easier to use from what i've been 
able to determine (ie even i can figure it out :P), but i'll grab wincvs 
again and see if i can make more sense of the CVS setup you guys use for ODE

mike w
www.gekidodesigns.com

gl wrote:
> There's a VC6 workspace available in CVS (in \VC6).  It should load into the
> newer MS IDEs too.
> 
> Anybody working with ODE should really dig into CVS.  The official releases
> tend to be pretty out-of-date, and the ODE source generally only gets
> updated with solid code (works-in-progress end up in the 'contrib' dir), so
> you won't usually break anything by doings so.
> --
> gl
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mike Wuetherick" <mike at gekidodesigns.com>
> To: <ode at q12.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 2:03 AM
> Subject: Re: [ODE] compiled libs
> 
> 
> 
>>agreed.  i've had to basically put ODE development on hold because i
>>just don't have enough time in the day to decipher the build process as
>>of yet.
>>
>>the prebuilt lib & dll helped, at least i could get the library added to
>>my project, but without the ability to maintain my own compile it sort
>>of defeats the purpose of being 'open-source', at least for VC6 users...
>>
>>just my 2 bits.
>>
>>cheers
>>mike w
>>www.realityfactory.ca
>>
>>John Miles wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Well, the problem stems from the fact that ODE's platform-specific
>>>configuration process is driven by an insanely-obfuscated C program
> 
> known as
> 
>>>"configurator.c", which is intended to autogenerate a config.h file
> 
> that's
> 
>>>optimized for the compiler/platform combination in question.  The
>>>compilation errors you get when you first build the ODE library result
> 
> from
> 
>>>configurator.c building different versions of config.h until it compiles
>>>successfully.
>>>
>>>Maintaining configurator.c is non-trivial to say the least.  I probably
>>>spent two hours futzing with it to eliminate the DLL export declaration
>>>problems in the MSVC build, but the problem is, being strictly a Win32
> 
> guy,
> 
>>>I can't be sure that my changes are still compatible with the other
>>>platforms and compilers that ODE supports.  It doesn't make sense for me
> 
> to
> 
>>>submit my build to CVS, because it will likely make the Linux/GCC folks'
>>>lives as annoying as the current snapshot makes MSVC users' lives.
>>>
>>>The right thing to do (IMHO) would be for the ODE maintainers to ditch
> 
> both
> 
>>>configurator.c and msvcdefs.def, and hand-author config.h files and
>>>makefiles for the various supported compilers and platforms, using
> 
> macros
> 
>>>correctly to supply the appropriate __declspec declarations for Win32
> 
> DLL
> 
>>>builds.  ODE is not a large library, and it doesn't have to support
> 
> *that*
> 
>>>many configurations.  It is ludicrous to use 500 lines of unreadable C
> 
> code
> 
>>>to generate a 50-line header file, but only a multiplatform-literate
>>>maintainer will be able to remedy the situation.
>>>
>>>(No offense to anyone intended, by the way.  I don't usually launch into
>>>wild-eyed drooling rants about free software, but my development time is
>>>*not* free, and sorting out the various build problems with ODE has cost
> 
> me
> 
>>>a fair bit of it.  I wish I could do more to help.)
>>>
>>>-- jm
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Ian McMeans [mailto:imcmeans at telus.net]
>>>>Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2004 1:43 PM
>>>>To: John Miles; ode at q12.org
>>>>Subject: Re: [ODE] compiled libs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, when I copy over the single-precision ode\config.h header file, I
> 
> no
> 
>>>>longer get that "ODE Message 2" runtime error. I'm guessing what was
>>>>happening was my code was passing doubles as parameters, the code was
>>>>expecting floats, and something broke.
>>>>
>>>>Now it works, thanks :) Since this was so handy for me, maybe you
>>>>could make
>>>>the things you built more official? I guess future versions of ode will
> 
> be
> 
>>>>more cleanly integrated with opcode so it might not be a problem.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>ODE mailing list
>>>ODE at q12.org
>>>http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>ODE mailing list
>>ODE at q12.org
>>http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
> http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
> 
>