[ale] [OT] Any Eclipse and C users on the list

[Michael Potter]

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Ryan Curtin <ryan at igglybob.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:22:04PM -0500, Michael Potter wrote:
>> Ale Crew,
>>
>> I am posting this here because:
>> 1) Eclipse is open source and runs on Linux,
>> 2) I will be using Eclipse on CentOS,
>> 3) I will be using Eclipse on C code (as opposed to Java).
>>
>> I could use the help of an Eclipse expert who uses Eclipse with C.
>>
>> I am converting a project from being compiled with "./configure; make"
>> to be compiled under Eclipse.
>>
>> Although Eclipse allows invoking make, I have found that it will not
>> meet programmers expectations of a project that was originally
>> developed on Eclipse.
>>
>> Three things make it not clean:
>> a) I use some bash scripts to generate code; scripts invoked by make.
>> b) I use some bash scripts to generate some makefiles; scripts invoked
>> by configure.
>> c) I have many targets in the make file including several shared objects.
>>
>> I want to refactor the project to be more "Eclipse Friendly".
>>
>> Anyone on this group use Eclipse and C and can give me some tips?  I
>> am willing to pay.
>
> Hello Michael,
>
> You emailed president at lugatgt.org looking for the guy who gave the CMake
> presentation last February and it was me.  I figured it would be more
> helpful to reply to the whole ALE list so my "wisdom" (or lack thereof)
> can be publicly archived for the ages.
>
>> One of the things that I like about cmake is that it allows building
>> in a separate directory than the source.  I always hand-code my
>> makefiles to do this and wondered why build systems did not do this.
>
> I do want to note that autotools supports out-of-source builds just like
> CMake.  For instance, with your autotoolized project, try this:
>
> $ mkdir build
> $ cd build
> $ ../configure
> $ make
>
> I think gcc, which uses autotools, actually forces you to do an
> out-of-source build (even though autotools does not require it).
>
> Based on what you have written, I get the idea that your project is not
> using autotools and instead './configure' is handwritten.  Is this
> correct?  I am trying to understand the problem.
>
> --
> Ryan Curtin       | "Leave the gun.  Take the cannoli."
> ryan at igglybob.com |   - Clemenza
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo

You are correct.
My ./configure is a hand written bash script.  It generates three things:
1) A config.h that has #defines in it that define the operating system
specific and user preferences.

2) A config.sh that has variable defined.  I use ". config.sh" in the
bash scripts that are part of the package.

3) A ton of make files that are included in the hand coded makefiles.

The makefile generator scans the .c files for "#include" then adds the
included file to the list of dependencies.

It is a home grown system that works well, but it is not mainstream.
I want to move to a mainstream scheme.

-- 
Michael Potter
  Tapp Solutions, LLC
  Replatform Technologies, LLC
+1 770 815 6142  ** Atlanta ** michael at potter.name  **
www.linkedin.com/in/michaelpotter