> The reason I'm asking is that we're changing the > --with-next-framework support beyond all recognition to make it > work on Mac OS X. I am probably breaking what was there previously, > BUT I'm pretty convinced that that didn't work anyway as it stood. Do you really need to call the option --with-next-framework? First, I think it should be an --enable option, since you are not offering to use or not to use some external tool or library. Furthermore, I find it very confusing to have to invoke incantations involving NeXT when compiling software for Mac OS. That Steve Jobs is head of the company is *not* enough reason :-) Finally, if you are going to break what it currently does, you may just as well remove the current code. I don't know whether NeXT(Step?) should be supported anymore, but I definitely know that MacOS should not be the vehicle to keep the NeXT code forever. I also know that system specific code simpler if you know what system it is intended to work on. Out of curiosity: Just what is a framework? (Should that be Jack, what is a framework ?-) Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4