JAM, Makefile and CEL

[bernardofd]

Hi!

Well, I'm having quite problems trying to set up an simple application in CrystalSpace with collision detect, LOD and others features (my difficulty resides basically in CD). In this same forum, I was notified that using CEl, at least the CD system set up would be simple. Well, it worth a try, isn't it?

Well, I've downloaded the sources but I noted tha CEL, besides CS, require the JAM compiling system instead of the goo' ol' Makefile. Not a problem. But I didn't have found any single file in Jam's homepage, CS's or even in Google that contains the system. All that I've found is one CVS-like page that I can download the files one by one... Well, this sounds as a lot of work!

My questions are:

1) Where specifically I can found a tarball or something "one-single-file" where I can install jam? Source preferred, not rpm or deb packages.

2) Why have CEL gived up of the GNU Makefiles?

Thanks in advance.

[jorrit]

Hi!

Well, I'm having quite problems trying to set up an simple application in CrystalSpace with collision detect, LOD and others features (my difficulty resides basically in CD). In this same forum, I was notified that using CEl, at least the CD system set up would be simple. Well, it worth a try, isn't it?

Collision detection in CEL is pretty easy yes.

Well, I've downloaded the sources but I noted tha CEL, besides CS, require the JAM compiling system instead of the goo' ol' Makefile. Not a problem. But I didn't have found any single file in Jam's homepage, CS's or even in Google that contains the system. All that I've found is one CVS-like page that I can download the files one by one... Well, this sounds as a lot of work!

My questions are:

1) Where specifically I can found a tarball or something "one-single-file" where I can install jam? Source preferred, not rpm or deb packages.

2) Why have CEL gived up of the GNU Makefiles?

Jam is a lot better (faster and easier to use). In CS we also prefer jam btw. It is just that we provide backwards compatibility with make there.

I can't check right now (problems with ftp) but can't you download jam from ftp://ftp.perforce.com/jam/ ?

Greetings,

[bernardofd]

Jam is a lot better (faster and easier to use). In CS we also prefer jam btw. It is just that we provide backwards compatibility with make there.

I can't check right now (problems with ftp) but can't you download jam from ftp://ftp.perforce.com/jam/ ?

Greetings,

Ok, but why did you not continue with the normal Makefiles in CEL??

About the FTP, it don't seem to wotk via browser (Error 425 or something). And I'm inexperienced in FTP-clients. Isn't there any HTTP links for downloading Jam?

[jorrit]

Jam is a lot better (faster and easier to use). In CS we also prefer jam btw. It is just that we provide backwards compatibility with make there.

I can't check right now (problems with ftp) but can't you download jam from ftp://ftp.perforce.com/jam/ ?

Greetings,

Ok, but why did you not continue with the normal Makefiles in CEL??

Because that's effort. And jam is better. We prefer to maintain only one system.

About the FTP, it don't seem to wotk via browser (Error 425 or something). And I'm inexperienced in FTP-clients. Isn't there any HTTP links for downloading Jam?

I'm afraid not. Try to use an ftp client.

Greetings,

If you look in CS in apps\tools\jam you will find the source of jam and a makefile to compile it.

-M