Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Le 22/04/2013 19:46, Jonathan Aquilina a écrit : Rainer what i want to understand is why use an external build tool when there is an equivalent to make built directly into visual studio. think its time for me to fire up the win 8 box and run nmake from command line and see if that does anything or if it works. Probably to remove the dependency to MS compiler ? With MinGW you can use GCC as C/C++ compiler. Best regards. JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Wouldnt using the Ms Compiler for windows builds be less of a nightmare and less breakage occuring then using mingw? On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Jean-Baptiste Faure jbf.fa...@sud-ouest.org wrote: Le 22/04/2013 19:46, Jonathan Aquilina a écrit : Rainer what i want to understand is why use an external build tool when there is an equivalent to make built directly into visual studio. think its time for me to fire up the win 8 box and run nmake from command line and see if that does anything or if it works. Probably to remove the dependency to MS compiler ? With MinGW you can use GCC as C/C++ compiler. Best regards. JBF -- Seuls des formats ouverts peuvent assurer la pérennité de vos documents. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Hi Jonathan, *, On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.com wrote: Rainer what i want to understand is why use an external build tool when there is an equivalent to make built directly into visual studio. You are completely missing the point here. The default build /does/ use Visual Studio Compiler, that is the default setup/the only officially supported one to begin with. mingw ist not a make system, but a compiler. nmake is not a compiler, but a make-tool. Replacing one by the other just doesn't work, since they do completely different things. LO uses gnu make as its make-tool since that is available to all relevant systems and supports the features that are needed. And if you're wondering why the build uses the Microsoft compiler instead: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Windows_Build_Dependencies#Why_MSVC.3F ## Why MSVC? It is a frequently asked question, usually coming from free software purists, why we use proprietary compiler instead of a free one (e.g. gcc). ABI backwards-compatibility for compiled extensions. There is some resistance to breaking that - also so far MSVC produces faster, smaller binaries. There are also some features in the code that don't compile with MinGW. They use API that MinGW does not provide headers for etc. In addition to above points also there are also open questions around how we would run unit tests in a MinGW cross-compilation environment and how well gdb works on Windows; the MSVC C++ debugger is really quite good. ## You're comparing apples and oranges. That just doesn't make any sense. ciao Christian -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Thanks for the clarification as this has given me a better understanding in terms of the build setup used by LO. My question now becomes why is it so hard to get a proper build environment setup for buidling LO on windows, as well as it being easier to break out of all the platforms supported. On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Christian Lohmaier lohmaier+ooofut...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi Jonathan, *, On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.com wrote: Rainer what i want to understand is why use an external build tool when there is an equivalent to make built directly into visual studio. You are completely missing the point here. The default build /does/ use Visual Studio Compiler, that is the default setup/the only officially supported one to begin with. mingw ist not a make system, but a compiler. nmake is not a compiler, but a make-tool. Replacing one by the other just doesn't work, since they do completely different things. LO uses gnu make as its make-tool since that is available to all relevant systems and supports the features that are needed. And if you're wondering why the build uses the Microsoft compiler instead: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Windows_Build_Dependencies#Why_MSVC.3F ## Why MSVC? It is a frequently asked question, usually coming from free software purists, why we use proprietary compiler instead of a free one (e.g. gcc). ABI backwards-compatibility for compiled extensions. There is some resistance to breaking that - also so far MSVC produces faster, smaller binaries. There are also some features in the code that don't compile with MinGW. They use API that MinGW does not provide headers for etc. In addition to above points also there are also open questions around how we would run unit tests in a MinGW cross-compilation environment and how well gdb works on Windows; the MSVC C++ debugger is really quite good. ## You're comparing apples and oranges. That just doesn't make any sense. ciao Christian -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Was nmake looked at as an alternative to mingw? as it is its part of visual studio and works with make files just like make does. what does mingw have that nmake doesnt? i feel switching would greatly reduce build complexity in terms of building on windows. -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
I am adding Rainer to this as I think he has some points about mingw - Rainer opinions? If you're not interested, sorry for the cc Best, Joel On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.comwrote: Was nmake looked at as an alternative to mingw? as it is its part of visual studio and works with make files just like make does. what does mingw have that nmake doesnt? i feel switching would greatly reduce build complexity in terms of building on windows. -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- *Joel Madero* LibreOffice QA Volunteer jmadero@gmail.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Joel we are really complicating things with mingw when all one would need to do is install visual studio and run nmake from its command line and you are good to go. On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: I am adding Rainer to this as I think he has some points about mingw - Rainer opinions? If you're not interested, sorry for the cc Best, Joel On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.com wrote: Was nmake looked at as an alternative to mingw? as it is its part of visual studio and works with make files just like make does. what does mingw have that nmake doesnt? i feel switching would greatly reduce build complexity in terms of building on windows. -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- *Joel Madero* LibreOffice QA Volunteer jmadero@gmail.com -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Rainer what i want to understand is why use an external build tool when there is an equivalent to make built directly into visual studio. think its time for me to fire up the win 8 box and run nmake from command line and see if that does anything or if it works. On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Rainer Bielefeld libreoff...@bielefeldundbuss.de wrote: Joel Madero schrieb: I am adding Rainer to this as I think he has some points about mingw - Hi Joel, unfortunately I have no knowledge at all. The only reason for my MinGW activity was that for a long time MinGW tinderbox build much more reliably that the others so that it often was my only source for Master builds. But unfortunately the results always only were usable for some tests, but never for real use. And currently MingW builds are broken. So thinking about alternatives is appreciated. But of course, there might be some strategig thoughts I don't know? As far as I know Eilidh McAdam had some activity with MinGW, and also Michael Meeks, but that knowledge is very old (March 2012). May be you should ask them or at an ESC call concerning the current strategy. Best regards Rainer -- Jonathan Aquilina -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] NMake vs MinGW
Joel Madero schrieb: I am adding Rainer to this as I think he has some points about mingw - Hi Joel, unfortunately I have no knowledge at all. The only reason for my MinGW activity was that for a long time MinGW tinderbox build much more reliably that the others so that it often was my only source for Master builds. But unfortunately the results always only were usable for some tests, but never for real use. And currently MingW builds are broken. So thinking about alternatives is appreciated. But of course, there might be some strategig thoughts I don't know? As far as I know Eilidh McAdam had some activity with MinGW, and also Michael Meeks, but that knowledge is very old (March 2012). May be you should ask them or at an ESC call concerning the current strategy. Best regards Rainer -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
