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

[tarnyko tarnyko net]

Hi Martyn, 

I remember having browsed Berke's website some months ago. There's no 
relation between us, but it's definitely well-maintained and polished (I'm 
especially fond of the dependency graph ^^). 

Our build systems seem to be quite different. As Arnavion pointed out, this 
one uses VC++ whereas I use MinGW. I prefer MinGW for the following reasons 
: 

- MinGW can be used from Linux (cross-compilation). In fact, I just made it 
work, see my former mail on the list ;
- patches are easier to push upstream (MinGW = GCC, which is kind of the 
reference compiler). 

Plus, please note that generated binaries may be incompatible 
("libgtk-3-0.dll" generated by MSVC won't play nice with "libglib-2.0.dll" 
generated by MinGW e.g.). 

However, a VC++ build has the advantage of being of better use to people
who prefer, or are required, to work with this particular compiler. And it 
allows them to use newer versions of msvcrt.dll, too. 

Maybe the 2 build systems can coexist in harmony. Some examples come to 
mind, like ClamAV for Windows (http://oss.netfarm.it/clamav/), whose author 
provides binaries generated by the 2 systems, ultimately letting users 
choose which one they prefer. 

It may be a good option if we both reach a good level a maturity. I think 
it's ultimately up to you and the GTK+ devs... 

Please find some notes on your questions and suggestions below : 


Martyn Russell writes: 

> On 12/04/13 02:30, Arnavion wrote:
> > Hello,
>
> 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 gtk.hexchat.org
> > <http://gtk.hexchat.org> 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 https://github.com/hexchat/gtk-win32
> > 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).

I'm currently doing this for GTK+ itself and some external deps :
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2013-March/msg00110.html 

> - Downloads available from gtk.org, 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 gtk.org and was wary of that. 
>
> - People taking maintainer-ship of providing bundles, msvc builds, etc and 
> helping with updates to the gtk.org website in respect to that.

I'm OK to claim maintainership for my build system, giving mail addresses
and URLs to contact me in case of question/problem.  I just registered on 
Git BTW, you have mail on bugzilla ^^ 
(https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695600). 

> - 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.

Same here, news on Bugzilla ^^ 
(https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695600). 

> 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. 
>
> --
> Regards,
> Martyn 
>
> Founder and CEO of Lanedo GmbH.
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-devel-list gnome org
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list

Regards,
Tarnyko