bug-cvs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Question: Windows Build - feature branch


From: Conrad T. Pino
Subject: RE: Question: Windows Build - feature branch
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 09:17:15 -0700

Hi Derek,

> From: Derek Robert Price [mailto:address@hidden
> 
> WinCVS has started defaulting to using CVSNT...
> ...  If you run out of Windows tasks, porting CVSNT features back to
> CVS one at a time until the code bases match would be useful work.

Thank you for the encouragement.  I'll keep that in mind.

> >=====================
> >Can you say who the other active stake holders in the Windows build process 
> >are?

I'm assuming the answer is, "No, the other stake holders aren't known."

> >Is dropping support for VC 5.0 in favor of VC 6.0 an option?
> 
> I think Dennis objected to that.  As long as someone else is
> regenerating the build files when necessary, I don't mind checking them in.

OK.  Can you send me Dennis' email address?  I'd like to understand
his concerns to make sure they're addressed in my path forward.

> >Is adding a complete set distinctly named VC 6.0 build files and keeping VC 
> >5.0
> >files in a semi-maintained state an option?

I'd appreciate your opinion to the above question.

> >=====================
> >What is the current level of support for building CVS with gcc on Windows?
> 
> It can be done with Cygwin, but the executable built is only useful from
> the Cygwin Bash shell, as far as I can tell.  I think I jumped through
> some hoops once to enable the Cygwin binary to find the Cygwin DLL, but
> we still couldn't ship the binary since users would need to install
> Cygwin to use CVS.

Do you have any thoughts about MinGW http://www.mingw.org/?

> I haven't tried the DJGPP version of GCC yet.  It is possible that it
> doesn't suffer from the same limitations as Cygwin.  If you have time to
> research that and would like to report back, I would like to hear.

DJGPP http://www.delorie.com/djgpp/ looks problematic since it's target OS
is DOS, MS-DOS and compatibles.  The current Windows build targets the Win32
API and DJGPP targets the DOS API.  I'm concerned we lose too munch function
with the DOS API.

> >Is dropping VC support in favor of gcc on Windows an option?
> 
> Not unless we can build a binary that works without the build
> environment installed, I think.

I was thinking the same thing.

> It might be interesting to look into what CVSNT is doing in this
> area too since they have a more Windows-centric focus.

Learning another project sounds daunting but I will take a peek.

> Derek

Conrad





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]