Dialogs in library organization

[Dar Scott]

On Wednesday, February 4, 2004, at 12:02 PM, Rob Cozens wrote:

> I expect others to do that with Serendipity Library also; so if your 
> pondering raises or settles issues, I'd like to know.

Here is the issue.

It seems that _in general_ the Distribution Builder cannot create a 
single monolithic application.  It can take only one stack file and 
create an application.  However, it can move over the other stack files 
and set some properties appropriately.  Fortunately, on OS X, the 
stacks are put down inside the application bundle, so the result looks 
effectively monolithic.  (I don't understand the rationale for the 
particular folder, but that is a separate issue.)  However, on Windows, 
all stack files other than that of the primary stack file are outside 
the application.

Now, it could be I'm using the DB wrong.

So how does one make a monolithic application on Windows?  The best I 
can tell, in the direct way one has to move all the stacks and their 
substacks over to be substacks of the application stack.  Now, my 
message path has changed.  Typically this does not make a difference as 
name conflicts are unlikely, but I might make mistakes (theoretically).

(I was a little confused about this, since the DB, that is, the 
Distribution Builder, seems to use the word "stack" for "stack file" in 
some places.  In another place it listed the stacks and it included the 
main stacks of listed stack files and the substacks of the main stack 
file, but not the substacks of the stack files not main.)

Now that I think about it, my message path is changed anyway.  I 
remember something about the main stack of the executable main stack 
file being inserted into the message path after the main stack for a 
stack.  Maybe in IDE testing this can be emulated by putting it at the 
front of the libraries or something.

(BTW, I noticed that when building an OS X standalone the DB used the 
OS X I was running as a model instead of one in the engines folder.  
This carries over all the tweaking I've done to the original, such as 
placing externals inside.  I'm not sure whether this is a feature I 
like or not.  It has both advantages and disadvantages.  There is no OS 
X in the engines folder, so maybe if I put one there, it would take 
that one, instead.)

So the issues:
For other than OS X, the result is not monolithic, in general.
If forced to be, the path is not what it was in most debugging and 
testing.
Oh, the application main stack is moved in the message path anyway.

Dar Scott