Posts: 4,997
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
12
What file is being modified now that you've removed the autoconf step from each?
Posts: 414
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation:
0
don't know, it won't compile again. this time it borkes near the end of the make.
The following build commands failed:
XBMC:
CompileC build/XBMC.build/Debug/XBMC.build/Objects-normal/i386/SDLMain.o /Users/craig/XBMC/xbmc/osx/SDLMain.mm normal i386 objective-c++ com.apple.compilers.gcc.4_0
(1 failure)
Main Rig [Scorpius] - Core i7 2600k @ 5Ghz. 16 Gig DDR3 1600. 1x HD 6990 1x HD 4870 Hackintosh [Chiana] - Core i5 @ 3.8Ghz. 12 Gig DDR3 Linux [Moya] - Core2 Duo E8200 - 2 Gigs DDR2 800 WHS [Zhaan] - DualCore [email protected] - 4 Gigs DDR2 800 VMC [Jothee] Core2 Quad @ 2.8Ghz 4 Gigs DDR2 800 VMC [Aeryn] Core2 E8400 @ 3.0Ghz 2 Gigs DDR2 800 2TB Server [Talyn] Core2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.0Ghz - 8 Gigs DDR2 1066 FileServer [Crichton] P4 650 3.4GHz - 2 Gigs DDR
Posts: 4,997
Joined: May 2004
Reputation:
12
Right, got my threads mixed up. Moved that discussion about the modified file to the right one.
That header was removed today, I'm sure davilla will get around to giving OSX love ASAP.
Posts: 11,582
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation:
84
davilla
Retired-Team-XBMC Developer
Posts: 11,582
2009-07-17, 20:42
(This post was last modified: 2009-07-17, 20:58 by davilla.)
humm builds as 10.4, fails as 10.5. Don't see anything really wrong.
For now, I would build 10.4, there's no difference between the two with respect to performance. The 10.4 build is the recommended method.
EDIT: Did this just start recently ? If so, when was the last successful build.