On 03/02/2013 11:33 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > So... building openconnect in a full AOSP build tree, as Jason and I had > been doing, is probably not the best way to do it. What *should* we do? > Should we provide a script which downloads the libxml/gnutls/etc > tarballs and configures+builds them using the NDK, and then builds > openconnect against them? That's what cerbero is actually. I've put my copy at gitorious (which includes package rules for gnutls and openconnect). https://gitorious.org/gnutls/cerbero Furthermore it handles building on other embedded systems (like ios), and this one of the reasons I like it. > Or even just expect them to be extracted in > the local directory, and add their C files directly to the openconnect > Android.mk (which perhaps should be called Application.mk? ) I'm not familiar with Android development. Would it be possible for an apk package that contains a java front-end, to contain .so libraries built not with the Android.mk way? If that's the case, then going with the easiest way of building without special rules or makefiles would make sense. However, for such platforms I think what matters is having binaries rather than a perfect built system. These platforms (like any embedded platform) are short-lived, and by the time you make the perfect build system for one it is already deprecated. regards, Nikos
