Re: Gtkmm Windows installers available

[stotz gmx ch (Urs Stotz)]

On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 10:50:10PM +0200, Armin Burgmeier wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 18:14 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 13:55 +0200, Armin Burgmeier wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 18:49 -0400, Philip Kovacs wrote:
> > > > On the "Building gtkmm on Windows" web page I note the statement:
> > > > 
> > > > "We suggest that you use MSYS to build gtkmm on Windows."
> > > > 
> > > > This statement can only be be interpreted as:
> > > 
> > > This is meant as: "If you want to build gtkmm with MinGW, then we
> > > recommend using MSYS to do so", since it is in the "Using MinGW"
> > > section. I made it more clear on the Wiki page.
> > > 
> > > > "We suggest that you build your project, gtkmm and another other C++ libraries
> > > > you intend to build from source with MSYS."
> > > > 
> > > > Building any C++ project component with MINGW/MSYS means a total commitment
> > > > to that environment/build system for all C++ project components.  C++ projects
> > > > and the libraries that they use must be built with the same compiler, due to
> > > > name mangling, exception handling, stack issues, etc.
> > > > 
> > > > "The MSVC++ DLLs have been built with Visual C++ 2005."
> > > > 
> > > > is fine, but better would be:
> > > > 
> > > > "The MSVC++ DLLs have been built with Visual C++ 2005 and are linked to the
> > > >  MS C/C++ runtime DLLs: MSVCR80.DLL / MSVCP80.DLL."
> > > 
> > > It's a Wiki. Feel free to improve things yourself.
> > > 
> > > > In my case, my Windows system has a later runtime environment: MSVCR90.DLL /
> > > > MSVCP90.DLL (MS Visual Studio 2008), so I have to recompile anyway. I think
> > > > cautioning people to verify which MS C/C++ runtime they have: 70/80/90, etc.
> > > > before using the binary installer would be a good thing.
> > > 
> > > I don't have too much experience with different runtimes, but I
> > > succeeded in building a small example application with Visual Studio
> > > 2008 against the binaries of the installer, which have been built with
> > > Visual Studio 2005. Doesn't this work in general?
> > > 
> > > I think the MSVCR80 runtime files are still shipped with Visual Studio
> > > 2008.
> > > 
> > > > Anyway, I have built each of: gtkmm/glibmm/sigc++/cairomm sucessfully with
> > > > MS VC++ 2008.  I just wish there were a way to automate the installation of
> > > > the development files to a target path from that gtkmm source tree.
> > > 
> > > If that's indeed a problem, then we probably need to ship separate files
> > > for both Visual Studio 2005 (linked against *80.DLL) and 2008 (linked
> > > against *90.DLL).
> > 
> > That does sound necessary. People would otherwise sometimes be forced to
> > link to both, which is probably unpleasant. Can you take care of that,
> > please, Armin?
> 
> Yes. We will have to think of a naming convention for those binaries.
> gtkmm-2.4-vc9.dll? (in contrast to gtkmm-2.4.dll for VS 2005, which we
> might then rename to gtkmm-2.4-vc8.dll, possibly breaking compatibility)
> 
> But I'm still not 100% convinced. Do other C++ projects that provide
> Windows binaries also ship different DLLs for each Visual Studio
> Version?

A way to solve this problem with different MSVS versions (and service pack)
could be to split the installer in two pieces the C part with GTK+
and the C++ part with GTKmm and create a builder for GTKmm.
In the current situation I use the installer to get an actual GTK+ environment
and build GTKmm self with MSVS and primitive scripts.

Perhaps it's possible to setting up on jhbuild
or writing something like jhbuild.
Is anyone interested in a GTKmm builder?

Regards,
Urs