From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20190 invoked by alias); 7 Nov 2003 23:46:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact xconq7-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: xconq7-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 20183 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2003 23:46:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO garm.central.cmich.local) (141.209.15.48) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 7 Nov 2003 23:46:50 -0000 Received: from leon.phy.cmich.edu ([141.209.165.20]) by egate1.central.cmich.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 7 Nov 2003 18:46:34 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by leon.phy.cmich.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F18070017; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 18:46:25 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 00:40:00 -0000 From: Eric McDonald To: "Brandon J. Van Every" Cc: xconq Subject: Re: Standardizing the Windows build In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Nov 2003 23:46:34.0546 (UTC) FILETIME=[608CF920:01C3A589] X-SW-Source: 2003/txt/msg00598.txt.bz2 On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Brandon J. Van Every wrote: > >From private discussion with Eric, it seems there is no standard, > canonical build environment for Xconq on Windows. There aren't even any > regular Windows developers, apparently? Xconq development is > Linux-centric I told you that Hans develops on the Mac. > I am willing to do the work of creating MS Visual Studio project files, > if we can come to a consensus on what the standards should be. A > non-exhaustive list of issues: > > - TCL distributions. Eric thinks the TCL binary currently distributed > with Cygwin is broken. I'm not sure myself, Actually, I'm the one who isn't sure. What I am pretty sure about is that the Cygwin Tcl installation on _your_ system is broken. If your TCL_INCLUDE_SPEC points to a nonexistent directory, then something isn't right. (And if this argument is going to reach flamewar crescendo again, let's take it back off-list.) > - Religion about commercial IDEs. If most of you think MS Visual Studio > is Evil, then we aren't going to get anywhere. Most of us Windoze It's not a matter of being evil. I simply would not want to say that I would want that to be the only approved, supported way to build Xconq under Windows. I think it can and should be an alternative though. And if you make it a viable alternative, I can't imagine anyone complaining. > I'd better give you full disclosure on my various development agendas. > That way you can make up your mind whether I'd be a welcome contributor > or a downright menace. It's hard to be a menace to GPL'd code unless you're stealing copyrights or violating the rather liberal terms of the license. > Second disclosure: I'm interested in DirectX and .NET stuff. Sure it's Some DirectX optimization for the Windows Tcl/Tk and SDL apps might be desirable. Eric