Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Leon Brooks]

On Wednesday 05 October 2005 03:11, Hal V. Engel wrote:
> Windows and
> Linux can live on the same machine with no problems.  So you do not
> have to "destroy the Wind32 environment".  Many of the folks on this
> list, myself included,  have both Linux and Windows running on the
> machines they use on a daily basis.  If all you need is enough of a
> Linux installation to get GIMP to build and to test GIMP then the
> amount of diskspace needed to do this is fairly small and you can
> free up a partition on your existing hard drive(s) to do this.  In
> addition, most Linux distros are free.  So this clearly does not take
> any money or new/additional hardware.

> The real issue is time.  Which is a valid concern but it might
> actually take less time and effort to get a working Linux environment
> than to mess around getting Windows setup to compile GIMP since most
> Linux distros will do this out of the box or very nearly so.  Some
> linux distros will do a minimal install in as little as a half hour.

Lance, please pardon the distro-centric plug, but Mandriva Linux will 
resize partitions to suit (doing a defrag before you boot the installer 
helps), is very easy to set up and use (lots of nice GUI helpers), free 
to download and either of LILO or GRUB are more than adequate as boot 
managers for the complete system.

  http://www.google.com.au/search?q=%222005-Limited-Edition-Download%22

Run this short script to set up a user's account for building RPMS:

http://mandrake.cyberknights.com.au/setup4rpm.sh

Install a source RPM for GIMP as that user, then copy a development 
tarball into rpm/SOURCES/ then tweak (with a text editor) the specfile 
at rpm/SPECS/gimp.spec to refer to it instead of the original, and 
you're away.

As Hal says, your main issue is going to be time. If you don't have an 
hour to stumble fearfully through a Linux installation, will you have 
time to do serious development?

Cheers; Leon

--
http://cyberknights.com.au/ Modern tools; traditional dedication
http://plug.linux.org.au/   Member, Perth Linux User Group
http://slpwa.asn.au/Member, Linux Professionals WA
http://osia.net.au/ Member, Open Source Industry Australia
http://linux.org.au/Member, Linux Australia
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Leon Brooks]

On Tuesday 04 October 2005 16:37, lode leroy wrote:
> Would it be feasible to create a big zip-file that contains
> everything for gimp for download?

If you call it "GIMP-toaster", many people will instantly recognise its 
purpose.

Cheers; Leon

-- 
http://cyberknights.com.au/ Modern tools; traditional dedication
http://plug.linux.org.au/   Member, Perth Linux User Group
http://slpwa.asn.au/Member, Linux Professionals WA
http://osia.net.au/ Member, Open Source Industry Australia
http://linux.org.au/Member, Linux Australia
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Leon Brooks]

On Wednesday 05 October 2005 01:50, Lance Dockins wrote:
>     * Time
>     * A spare hard drive
>     * A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
>     * Perhaps an alternate computer entirely
>     * Potential other hardware for those components that
>       Linux drivers don't function well on.

If you're in Australia, put a grant proposal to Linux Australia 
(www.linux.org.au). They'd probably be quite pleased to support GIMP 
development in this manner. The computer recycling places (like 
Computer Angels in WA and ComputerBank in Victoria) would also look 
favourably upon donating a machine to this cause.

Cheers; Leon

-- 
http://cyberknights.com.au/ Modern tools; traditional dedication
http://plug.linux.org.au/   Member, Perth Linux User Group
http://slpwa.asn.au/Member, Linux Professionals WA
http://osia.net.au/ Member, Open Source Industry Australia
http://linux.org.au/Member, Linux Australia
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4]

[Bill Kendrick]

On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 08:08:45PM -0400, michael chang wrote:
> Just to note, live systems on optical media won't preserve data
> between reboots without storing it somewhere, e.g. on a file or
> partition (Knoppix does this with some scripts somewhere IIRC).  I
> don't know about USB systems.

Well, the USB system was writable because, well, it's just flash memory. :)

-bill!
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[michael chang]

On 10/4/05, Tor Lillqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> lode leroy writes:
>  > The thing is that for compiling gimp from cvs, you need quite some 
> expertise
>  > in the autotools, libtool, aclocal, pkg-config etc to fix those
>  > not-100%-working-together- distributed binaries...
>
>  > Would it be feasible to create a big zip-file that contains everything for
>  > gimp for download?
>
> It would be possible, but wouldn't such a zipfile just create open up
> the possibility for even more confusion when there would then be yet
> another distribution of these libs? (A long time ago I *did*
> distribute self-built jpeg, tiff, zlib and whatnot, but stopped doing
> that as there were other distributions, too, that were just as good,
> or even more directly from the source, like zlib.)

Since you've found these better sources, I know it'd be a pain, but
could you include links to them somewhere?  That way, we can use the
same DLLs built that you do.  (I'm presuming you don't already; if you
do, my apologies.)

--
~Mike
 - Just my two cents
 - No man is an island, and no man is unable.
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[michael chang]

On 10/4/05, Lance Dockins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > this is so interesting.  Win32 has succeeded in making linux expensive.
> >
> > you are asking that the Win32 environment not work the way it was
> > designed to work -- at least i think this is what you are saying.
> >
> > i am very impressed that it was able to make free software expensive,
> > this is a simply amazing accomplishment!
> >
> Carol,
>  Where in my e-mail did your read that *Linux *was going to cost me
> money?  Read that sentence again.  Or, better yet, I'll quote it.  "I
> should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make
> this easier, *but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do
> so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the
> professional world.*"  Did I say that the money, time, and hardware I
> was going to invest was going to be invested in buying Linux or did I
> just say that I would have to invest money, time, and hardware into a
> Linux setup? Here's a few things that cost money that fit perfectly into
> that sentence.
>
> * Time
> * A spare hard drive
> * A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
> * Perhaps an alternate computer entirely
> * Potential other hardware for those components that Linux drivers
>   don't function well on.
>
> Before I sign off on this, let me quote the second half of that sentence
> again.  *"*But I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do so
> *without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the
> professional world.*" So that pretty much eliminates installing over top
> of my current OS.

Nonsense.  Debian's installer can resize ALL Win32 partitions (NTFS +
FAT) and make room for itself nondestructively.

--
~Mike
 - Just my two cents
 - No man is an island, and no man is unable.
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4]

[michael chang]

On 10/4/05, Bill Kendrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lance wrote:
> > * A spare hard drive
> > * A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
> > * Perhaps an alternate computer entirely
>
> Just to be a weenie, I'll mention live CDs like Knoppix.

There'll be a DVD version too, at one point...

> Or even USB-bootable systems.  (I got to play with one of those this past
> weekend at a friend's workplace.  Full desktop Linux system stuck in a
> bootable 1GB USB memory stick.  Sweet!)

Just to note, live systems on optical media won't preserve data
between reboots without storing it somewhere, e.g. on a file or
partition (Knoppix does this with some scripts somewhere IIRC).  I
don't know about USB systems.

They're fun to play with, of course, but doing serious work is usually
easiest with a perminant install; you only need ~1-3 GB to get the
base and GIMP running (I'd suggest more if you're going to do major
work in it).  Note that NTFS support in linux is patchy at best,
although FAT is supported pretty well.  (So if you're moving files,
you may want a small FAT partition to move stuff in between Lin/Win.)

--
~Mike
 - Just my two cents
 - No man is an island, and no man is unable.
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Hal V. Engel]

On Tuesday 04 October 2005 02:28 pm, Lance Dockins wrote:
> Hal V. Engel wrote:
> > If all you need is enough of a Linux installation to get GIMP
> > to build and to test GIMP then the amount of diskspace needed to do this
> > is fairly small and you can free up a partition on your existing hard
> > drive(s) to do this.
>
> Good point.  I thought of doing this myself, but in the past I've had to
> repartition my hard drive before a Linux install.  Do most Linux distros
> now come equipped with a partition manager that can handle an NT
> partition and successfully resize it without destroying it?  When I've
> previously done this, I've had to use Partition Magic which is the best
> proprietary software for this sort of thing, but even it had bugs in
> some prior versions that would crash an NT partition.  If most Linux
> distros now come equipped with such a partition manager and I can trust
> that my NT partition will safely remain intact, I may reconsider my
> former statement. But my biggest concern is that, at present, without a
> partition manager, I've still got to invest another $50 on top of losses
> due to time.  Not that that's a huge investment, but I've got other
> financial priorities that exceed an investment in a Partition Manager.
> Thanks in advance for your feedback.
>
> Lance

Yes most distros come with a partition manager that can handle this.  Of 
course, you should back things up just in case and it is a good idea to 
defrag the partition you are shrinking before you start.  I have also used 
the partition manager in boot-it which you can get as a trial version for $0.

Hal
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Gimp-developer] Let's tighten the ship a bit here ...

[William Skaggs]

Hey folks,

  Before you send a message to this list, please give a moment of thought
to whether the entire GIMP development community really needs to read 
what you are writing.  If not, how about using private email?

  Thank you,

  -- Bill

 

 
__ __ __ __
Sent via the CNPRC Email system at primate.ucdavis.edu


 
   
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Lance Dockins]

Hal V. Engel wrote:
If all you need is enough of a Linux installation to get GIMP 
to build and to test GIMP then the amount of diskspace needed to do this is 
fairly small and you can free up a partition on your existing hard drive(s) 
to do this.  
Good point.  I thought of doing this myself, but in the past I've had to 
repartition my hard drive before a Linux install.  Do most Linux distros 
now come equipped with a partition manager that can handle an NT 
partition and successfully resize it without destroying it?  When I've 
previously done this, I've had to use Partition Magic which is the best 
proprietary software for this sort of thing, but even it had bugs in 
some prior versions that would crash an NT partition.  If most Linux 
distros now come equipped with such a partition manager and I can trust 
that my NT partition will safely remain intact, I may reconsider my 
former statement. But my biggest concern is that, at present, without a 
partition manager, I've still got to invest another $50 on top of losses 
due to time.  Not that that's a huge investment, but I've got other 
financial priorities that exceed an investment in a Partition Manager.  
Thanks in advance for your feedback.


   Lance
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4]

[Bill Kendrick]

Lance wrote:
> * A spare hard drive
> * A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
> * Perhaps an alternate computer entirely

Just to be a weenie, I'll mention live CDs like Knoppix.
Or even USB-bootable systems.  (I got to play with one of those this past
weekend at a friend's workplace.  Full desktop Linux system stuck in a
bootable 1GB USB memory stick.  Sweet!)

-bill!
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Hal V. Engel]

On Tuesday 04 October 2005 09:58 am, Carol Spears wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 09:04:42AM -0500, Lance Dockins wrote:
> > I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make
> > this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do
> > so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the
> > professional world.  My guess is that's the case for many Windows users
> > who would like to be able to compile from tarball/CVS without such
> > hassles as we've described here.  Grant that I don't speak for everyone
> > using Win32, but I'd imagine you'd see a positive reception from such an
> > endeavor from more than one Win32 user.
>
> this is so interesting.  Win32 has succeeded in making linux expensive.
>
> you are asking that the Win32 environment not work the way it was
> designed to work -- at least i think this is what you are saying.
>
> i am very impressed that it was able to make free software expensive,
> this is a simply amazing accomplishment!
>
> carol
>

Carol was a little over the top but is making a valid point.  Windows and 
Linux can live on the same machine with no problems.  So you do not have to 
"destroy the Wind32 environment".  Many of the folks on this list, myself 
included,  have both Linux and Windows running on the machines they use on a 
daily basis.  If all you need is enough of a Linux installation to get GIMP 
to build and to test GIMP then the amount of diskspace needed to do this is 
fairly small and you can free up a partition on your existing hard drive(s) 
to do this.  In addition, most Linux distros are free.  So this clearly does 
not take any money or new/additional hardware.  

The real issue is time.  Which is a valid concern but it might actually take 
less time and effort to get a working Linux environment than to mess around 
getting Windows setup to compile GIMP since most Linux distros will do this 
out of the box or very nearly so.  Some linux distros will do a minimal 
install in as little as a half hour.

Hal
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Sven Neumann]

Hi,

Lance Dockins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to
> make this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware
> to do so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use
> in the professional world.  My guess is that's the case for many
> Windows users who would like to be able to compile from tarball/CVS
> without such hassles as we've described here.  Grant that I don't
> speak for everyone using Win32, but I'd imagine you'd see a positive
> reception from such an endeavor from more than one Win32 user.

Why would users want to compile development snapshots? I see the point
in making it easier for people to develop on Windows and I would also
like to see some features being tested earlier on all platforms, but
still fail to see why users would want to compile a 2.3.x release.
They can use the binary packages.


Sven
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Carol Spears]

yeah, i read something that seemed as if it was too expensive to use
free software and a sane build environment.  i have been wrong before.

carol

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Lance Dockins]

this is so interesting.  Win32 has succeeded in making linux expensive.

you are asking that the Win32 environment not work the way it was
designed to work -- at least i think this is what you are saying.

i am very impressed that it was able to make free software expensive,
this is a simply amazing accomplishment!
  

Carol,
Where in my e-mail did your read that *Linux *was going to cost me 
money?  Read that sentence again.  Or, better yet, I'll quote it.  "I 
should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make 
this easier, *but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do 
so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the 
professional world.*"  Did I say that the money, time, and hardware I 
was going to invest was going to be invested in buying Linux or did I 
just say that I would have to invest money, time, and hardware into a 
Linux setup? Here's a few things that cost money that fit perfectly into 
that sentence.


   * Time
   * A spare hard drive
   * A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
   * Perhaps an alternate computer entirely
   * Potential other hardware for those components that Linux drivers
 don't function well on.

Before I sign off on this, let me quote the second half of that sentence 
again.  *"*But I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do so 
*without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the 
professional world.*" So that pretty much eliminates installing over top 
of my current OS. 


Lance


___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[jernej]

On Tuesday, October 4, 2005, 18:11:36, Michael Schumacher wrote:

> It is also possible to create them yourself, from the DLL files. The MinGW
> docs contain a section about this (using pexports and dlltool, IIRC).

Didn't you write instructions for this in the wiki?


-- 
< Jernej Simoncic ><><><><>< http://deepthought.ena.si/ >

Creativity varies inversely with the number of cooks involved with the broth.
   -- Fitz-Gibbon's Law

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Carol Spears]

On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 09:04:42AM -0500, Lance Dockins wrote:
> 
> I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make 
> this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do 
> so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the 
> professional world.  My guess is that's the case for many Windows users 
> who would like to be able to compile from tarball/CVS without such 
> hassles as we've described here.  Grant that I don't speak for everyone 
> using Win32, but I'd imagine you'd see a positive reception from such an 
> endeavor from more than one Win32 user.
> 
this is so interesting.  Win32 has succeeded in making linux expensive.

you are asking that the Win32 environment not work the way it was
designed to work -- at least i think this is what you are saying.

i am very impressed that it was able to make free software expensive,
this is a simply amazing accomplishment!

carol

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Michael Schumacher]

> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> On Monday, October 3, 2005, 16:49:59, lode leroy wrote:
> 
> > So the "missing dll's" in question are a build-environment
> > issue, and not a gimp-compilation issue...
> 
> Just make sure you use the correct import libraries.

It is also possible to create them yourself, from the DLL files. The MinGW
docs contain a section about this (using pexports and dlltool, IIRC).


HTH,
Michael

-- 
5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Michael Schumacher]

> Von: "lode leroy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 
> >From: Tor Lillqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "lode leroy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >CC: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
> >Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4
> >Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 01:48:10 +0300
> >
> >lode leroy writes:
> >  > In fact, what happens is that when linking with ZLIB.DLL,
> >  > the exe expects ZLIB-1.DLL instead of ZLIB1.DLL. (or vice-versa).
> >
> >The official zlib dll is called zlib1.dll. Any other name means it is
> >not official. "Official" as in directly from real maintainer of
> >zlib. As the actual maintainer of zlib distributes Win32 zlib
> >binaries, I fail to see any reason why one would want to use anybody
> >else's version. I have only zlib1.dll on my system.
> 
> I agree with you Tor, but as the original poster wrote,
> it is very difficult to set up a build enviroment with everything
> correct to compile gimp (or other gtk based software for that matter)
> 
> Libraries and dependencies are changing, and the available binaries
> are sometimes not correctly packaged with missing or incorrect .m4 or .pc 
> files
> (especially the fontconfig and freefont,i.e. the one's you don't
> distribute 
> :-)

We should then let the packagers know... maybe they just don't get the right
hints? For example, gnuwin32 had these naming problems, and there is a way
to report bugs. I recall that the .a files of libxml2 were not usable with
the MinGW linker, this could be reported also...



HTH,
Michael

-- 
5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More +++
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Lance Dockins]

Tor Lillqvist wrote:

It would be possible, but wouldn't such a zipfile just create open up
the possibility for even more confusion when there would then be yet
another distribution of these libs? 

Tor,
   You're right.  Alternative packages always open up the possibility 
for more confusion when there are already so many Win32 binaries.  
Honestly though, I'd be willing to accept such a potential for confusion 
to find a packaged set of reliable Win32 binaries that would work with 
each other in a MinGW/Msys environment and provide a means of compiling 
GIMP from CVS/Tarball on Win32 without having to spend hours 
researching, compiling, and downloading to get the environment setup 
correctly.  For that matter, when I'm looking for reliable Win32 
binaries, your packages are amongst the top 3 I would trust.  Of course, 
finding such a zip anywhere would nearly be a godsend regardless of who 
compiled and packaged the binaries just because of the fact that it's so 
hard to find all the binaries you need in a Win32 environment in the 
first place. 

I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make 
this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do 
so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the 
professional world.  My guess is that's the case for many Windows users 
who would like to be able to compile from tarball/CVS without such 
hassles as we've described here.  Grant that I don't speak for everyone 
using Win32, but I'd imagine you'd see a positive reception from such an 
endeavor from more than one Win32 user.

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[Tor Lillqvist]

lode leroy writes:
 > The thing is that for compiling gimp from cvs, you need quite some expertise
 > in the autotools, libtool, aclocal, pkg-config etc to fix those
 > not-100%-working-together- distributed binaries...

 > Would it be feasible to create a big zip-file that contains everything for 
 > gimp for download?

It would be possible, but wouldn't such a zipfile just create open up
the possibility for even more confusion when there would then be yet
another distribution of these libs? (A long time ago I *did*
distribute self-built jpeg, tiff, zlib and whatnot, but stopped doing
that as there were other distributions, too, that were just as good,
or even more directly from the source, like zlib.)

--tml

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4

[lode leroy]

From: Tor Lillqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "lode leroy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 01:48:10 +0300

lode leroy writes:
 > In fact, what happens is that when linking with ZLIB.DLL,
 > the exe expects ZLIB-1.DLL instead of ZLIB1.DLL. (or vice-versa).

The official zlib dll is called zlib1.dll. Any other name means it is
not official. "Official" as in directly from real maintainer of
zlib. As the actual maintainer of zlib distributes Win32 zlib
binaries, I fail to see any reason why one would want to use anybody
else's version. I have only zlib1.dll on my system.


I agree with you Tor, but as the original poster wrote,
it is very difficult to set up a build enviroment with everything
correct to compile gimp (or other gtk based software for that matter)

Libraries and dependencies are changing, and the available binaries
are sometimes not correctly packaged with missing or incorrect .m4 or .pc 
files
(especially the fontconfig and freefont,i.e. the one's you don't distribute 
:-)


The thing is that for compiling gimp from cvs, you need quite some expertise
in the autotools, libtool, aclocal, pkg-config etc to fix those
not-100%-working-together- distributed binaries...

Would it be feasible to create a big zip-file that contains everything for 
gimp

for download?


--tml




___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer

[Gimp-developer] RE: Any suggestions?

[lode leroy]

On where to download the best Win32 binaries for a MinGW/MSys setup ?


I downloaded most binaries from http://www.mingw.org

MinGW-4.1.0.exe
binutils-2.15.91-20040904-1.tar.gz
gcc-core-3.4.2-20040916-1.tar.gz
gcc-g++-3.4.2-20040916-1.tar.gz
mingw-runtime-3.7.tar.gz
mingw-utils-0.3.tar.gz
msys-autoconf-2.59.tar.bz2
msys-automake-1.8.2.tar.bz2
w32api-3.2.tar.gz

I also downloaded and compiled a few packages from the newer mingwPORT 
project


autoconf-2.59-mingwPORT.tar.bz2
autoconf-2.59.tar.bz2
automake-1.9.5-mingwPORT.tar.bz2
automake-1.9.5.tar.bz2
intltool-0.33.tar.bz2
libiconv-1.9.2-mingwPORT.tar.bz2
libiconv-1.9.2.tar.gz
libtool-1.5.14-mingwPORT.tar.bz2
libtool-1.5.14.tar.gz

Then I also fixed a bug in pkg-config-0.15 to enable MSYS path names
in particular:
diff pkgconfig-0.15.0-orig/parse.c pkgconfig-0.15.0/parse.c
852c853
< const char *const lib_pkgconfig = "\\lib\\pkgconfig";
---

const char *const lib_pkgconfig = "/lib/pkgconfig";


Then I downloaded most support packages from TML's site...
And also compiled some from source myself
(libcroco, libxml2, libxslt, librsvg, popt)

Unfortunately I didn't keep track of the problems/changes I
encountered, and how I fixed them... I did this some time
ago... (I also used this setup to compile inkscape, so some
things may have been for inkscape only...)



From: Lance Dockins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: lode leroy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Any suggestions?
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2005 12:54:44 -0500

On where to download the best Win32 binaries for a MinGW/MSys setup so I 
can craft the right environment to compile GIMP from either CVS or tarball? 
 I've managed to get GIMP compiling from tarball, but everything seems to 
fall apart when compiling from CVS...


Or for that matter, I have to compile binaries for autoconf, automake, 
libtool, etc to get them in a position for either MSys or MinGW to run them 
(since GIMP requires later versions than MinGW's site has) and that often 
requires additional binaries and causes crashes.


However you got your setup working, I'd be grateful to hear...  Like did 
you download the binaries yourself or did you compile them?



___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer