Re: Windows 32/64bit downloads and/or bundles for 2.x and 3.x

On 12/04/13 02:30, Arnavion wrote:

Hello Arnavion,

I am a fellow Hexchat dev with bviktor, and I thought I'd just provide a
few clarifications:-
1. The instructions to build GTK+ on
<> are for building using Visual Studio 2012, as
opposed to Tarnkyo's work that uses MinGW. We use VS to build our entire
stack (GTK and its deps, openssl, and Hexchat itself).
2. We have indeed found several problems getting these to build with VS.
To that end, we have a bunch of patches scoured from the GTK bug tracker
and other places, as well as a few we've written ourselves. These
patches can be seen on
3. Our goal was to make it easy for the user to build the stack using
our instructions, for which we also provide a build script on the same
repository. (hexchat-build.ps1)

Thank you for those.

I would like to add that I know there are differences, but what I want to bring to the windows offering for users/developers is some unity and consistency so people not only have a choice between all flavours (32bit, 64bit, MSVC, MinGW, sources, binaries, bundles, etc).

I would like to see:

- Patches upstreamed in all cases where possible (like the ones you mention Arnavion).

- Downloads available from, not external sites to give end users a consistency and feeling these binaries are authentic and affiliated (this is most important IMO). I often wondered when I downloaded Tor's binaries back in the day why they weren't on and was wary of that.

- People taking maintainer-ship of providing bundles, msvc builds, etc and helping with updates to the website in respect to that.

- A well documented FAQ to help people with their disciplines on Windows (e.g. for MSVC or MinGW, for 32bit OR 64bit, etc). The current documentation is ... well ... old and chaotic IMO. I would like some easy steps people can follow to understand *which* Windows download they need depending on what they're doing (e.g. bundles for just everything with MinGW, or the hexchat stuff for MSVC sources only, etc). It should be as easy as installing GTK+ on a Linux distribution, this is something you can do in a few steps. As it currently stands, it's easier to build on a Linux distribution than to use on Windows.

Perhaps this is too utopian? But we should make it easy for people to use GTK+ on Windows. Looking at how you install or use Qt (for example), they have a similar problem. There are a bunch of steps to get started. I think GTK+ would look attractive if it was well supported and documented on Windows right from the download link. By that I mean, in 2 or 3 steps, from downloading, you're done setting it up.

In the end, I realise there are different requirements here, some people want just binaries to link against, others want to build the entire stack. But I think we should consider each of these use cases and have a clear wizard/path on the website to make it easy for people to get started with GTK+ on Windows with their compiler and architecture of choice.


Founder and CEO of Lanedo GmbH.

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