20,741
edits
Building FlightGear - Cross Compiling: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Goals
m (→Goals) |
m (→Goals) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
Allow Linux-based contributors to easily provide customized FlightGear binaries to Windows-based users by cross-compiling FlightGear and all its dependencies (OpenSceneGraph, PLIB, OpenAL, SimGear etc), including support for the new osgEarth mode, developed by poweroftwo. | Allow Linux-based contributors to easily provide customized FlightGear binaries to Windows-based users by cross-compiling FlightGear and all its dependencies (OpenSceneGraph, PLIB, OpenAL, SimGear etc), including support for the new osgEarth mode, developed by poweroftwo. | ||
For the sake of simplicity, we are hoping to provide a toolchain that is compatible with common *nix tools like ccache/distcc to help speed up compilation (especially on multi-core platforms), the focus of the underlying mxe-based tool chain will be building OpenSceneGraph 3.xx based applications like FlightGear and osgEarth. | For the sake of simplicity, we are hoping to provide a toolchain that is compatible with common *nix tools like ccache/distcc to help speed up compilation (especially on multi-core platforms), the focus of the underlying mxe-based tool chain will be building OpenSceneGraph 3.xx based applications like FlightGear and osgEarth. To keep mxe installation straightforward, we may provide deb/ppa packages (possibly using the OpenSuse Build Service) or even set up a VirtualBox appliance with mxe.osg pre-installed and configured for building OSG applications (including SG/FG). | ||
In addition, one challenge frequently encountered on the FlightGear forums is that RCs (release candidates) usually get very little, if any, thorough testing by end users and that Windows-based end-users form the largest share of our users, but most of them are unable to provide action-able bug reports, e.g. due to being unable to provide backtraces or running/using diagnostic tools like gdb, valgrind, google perftools etc. | In addition, one challenge frequently encountered on the FlightGear forums is that RCs (release candidates) usually get very little, if any, thorough testing by end users and that Windows-based end-users form the largest share of our users, but most of them are unable to provide action-able bug reports, e.g. due to being unable to provide backtraces or running/using diagnostic tools like gdb, valgrind, google perftools etc. | ||