Re: [Bug-gnubg] Win32 builds - new set of DLL

[Øystein Johansen]

Holger wrote:

> At 14:59 30.06.2003 +0200, Øystein Johansen wrote:
>
> > I have now updated all the libraries and compilers for my gnubg 
> > builds. This is what I currently use, and I think we should all use 
> > the same libraries.
> >
> > The compiler is now gcc-3.2.3 (mingw special 20030504-1)
> > http://www.mingw.org/download.shtml
>
>
> This shouldn't have any influence on the dependencies. But I do use 
> MinGW2 and likely will update to the latest stable.

Good, I think the later compilers simply makes better code. That's the 
main reason.

> > GTK+, GDK and Glib is all take from Tor's site.
> > http://www.gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/downloads.html
> >
> > Since GTK and glib from Tor's site depends on iconv.dll and 
> > libintl-1.dll, I think we all should make builds that depend only on 
> > these two dlls. DON'T TAKE libiconv OR libintl OR gettext LIBRARIES 
> > FROM ANY OTHER SITE!
> > That's libiconv-1.9-w32.2.bin.woe32.zip 
> > <http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/gettext/libiconv-1.9-w32.2.bin.woe32.zip?download> 
> > at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=25167
>
>
> At least for a description on how to compile gnubg I prefer 
> "libiconv-1.9.bin.woe32.zip" over "libiconv-1.9-w32.2.bin.woe32.zip". 
> The reason is simply that the latter has one directory hierarchy more 
> inside, so that it's not possible to just extract the contents to the 
> MinGW folder. The two versions are actually the same. The only 
> difference between them seems just to be that the version numbers were 
> set.
> For compiling gnubg personally, of course I'm able to pay attention to 
> the paths and will use "libiconv-1.9.bin.woe32.zip".

Yes, agreed! I just couldn't figure out the difference at first.

> > and http://www.gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/libintl-0.10.40-tml-20020904.zip
> > and http://www.gimp.org/~tml/gimp/win32/gettext-dev-0.10.40-20020904.zip
>
>
> And with the last 3 libraries start the problems I've mentioned 
> earlier in another post. See below at the end.

Yes, I see your point here... I'll make a suggestion at the end.

> > The following libraries is taken from GnuWin32, 
> > http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=23617
> >
> > gdbm is version 1.8.0
> > libpng is version 1.2.4
>
>
> current is 1.2.4-1

Yes, that's the one!

> > zlib is version 1.1.4
>
>
> 1.1.4-1
> But it seems zlib.dll is required. See below.
>
> > libxml version 2.4.12
>
>
> 2.4.12-1 (for the lib part)

Yes, again!

> > freetype version 2.1.4
> > libart 2.2.3 *
>
>
> libart is version 2.3.3-1 (the lib part)
>
> > *) libart has now become a part of the GNOME sources, and the latest 
> > release is 2.2.12, never mind this, I think we should just stick to 
> > 2.2.3. OK?
>
>
> That's what I've been using.

Good!

> > (I think I will start providing readline support to the gnubg-no-gui 
> > version. I'm not sure where I'll take the library from.)
> >
> > That's all! Can we agree to use the above listed program in our 
> > builds? Any other comments are welcome?
>
>
> OK, I'm trying it once more for checking that everything works:
>
> Installing the following into \MinGW2:
> 23.05.2003  14:55           12.825.271 MinGW-2.0.0-3.exe
> 23.05.2003  14:51              379.645 freetype-2.1.4-bin.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:51              442.461 freetype-2.1.4-lib.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:52               63.004 gdbm-1.8.0-bin.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:51                9.352 gdbm-1.8.0-lib.zip
> 30.06.2003  16:30              471.641 gettext-dev-0.10.40-20020904.zip
> 30.06.2003  16:30              563.106 glib-2.2.1.zip
> 30.06.2003  16:30              705.377 glib-dev-2.2.1.zip
> 30.06.2003  16:31              935.255 gtk+-1.3.0-20030216.zip
> 30.06.2003  16:30              366.381 gtk+-dev-1.3.0-20030115.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:52               89.190 libart-2.3.3-1-lib.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:52               70.145 libart-2.3.3-bin.zip
> 30.06.2003  16:19              707.990 
> libiconv-1.9-w32.2.bin.woe32.zip   (caution for path)
> 30.06.2003  16:30               27.590 libintl-0.10.40-tml-20020904.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:54              241.511 libpng-1.2.4-1-bin.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:54              318.243 libpng-1.2.4-1-lib.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:54              453.709 libxml2-2.4.12-1-lib.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:54              385.904 libxml2-2.4.12-bin.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:55              228.757 zlib-1.1.4-1-bin.zip
> 23.05.2003  14:55               52.503 zlib-1.1.4-1-lib.zip

Yes, but we'll change libiconv-1.9-w32.2.bin.woe32.zip 
to libiconv-1.9-bin.woe32.zip so we don't get the silly path.

> Building works well.

Here as well!

> Now to run it I've copied the executable to another folder and emptied 
> the search path, so it wouldn't find any libraries.
>
> gnubg (or maybe rather libpng) wants zlib.dll. It does not recognize 
> zlib-1.dll. Renaming zlib-1.dll to zlib.dll works however as expected.
> How do we want to deal with this?

I guess copying zlib-1.dll to zlib.dll must be the simplest temporary 
solution. At least that's what I've done in the latest setup.exe.

> For completeness, here is again the list of required dlls:
> 18.04.2003  11:36              364.726 freetype-6.dll
> 22.02.2002  21:51               38.899 gdbm.dll
> 20.05.2003  22:53              892.928 iconv.dll
> 30.06.2002  17:49               83.210 libart_lgpl.dll
> 21.12.2002  16:11              477.023 libgdk-0.dll
> 05.02.2003  07:00              627.213 libglib-2.0-0.dll
> 05.02.2003  07:07               38.003 libgmodule-2.0-0.dll
> 22.12.2002  22:32            1.571.463 libgtk-0.dll
> 04.09.2002  01:37               47.027 libintl-1.dll
> 14.08.2002  23:04              224.771 libpng.dll
> 22.12.2001  15:53              640.820 libxml2.dll
> 06.05.2003  21:06               80.954 zlib.dll

Yes!!! This is the list I vote for. As long as no one complain about 
this, I think we should all build on these libraries and nothing else.

> So far, so (almost) good. Now onto the problems I brought up above:
>
> For practical value I install more packages under MinGW than described 
> so far. Among others these are fileutils, diffutils, findutils, grep, 
> ssh and more. Already the most basic "rm" (which I use in my 
> Makefiles) from fileutils requires libintl-2.dll .
> So if I don't want to install the necessary libraries I can't use 
> those packages, which is out of choice. Thus, we need a different 
> solution. Any proposals?

Yes, I see this problem. Why didn't I see this before? Simply because I 
used this set of Unix tools: http://unxutils.sourceforge.net/
Thay may be a bit  outdated, but I havn't had any problems with'em. 
That's why I didn't see the problem. I also used to use libraries from 
this site: http://mingwrep.sourceforge.net/ which is also a bit outdated.

I still think we should build our binaries based iconv.dll and 
libintl-1.dll  from Tor's site. It's just so sick to have two differrent 
versions of the same library for the same application.

> Regards,
>
>         Holger 

I have now updated my installation archive on the web site, and I have 
included the necesarry dlls according to the text above.

Regards,
-Øystein