Re: new LyX 2.2.0 installer for Windows Vista is available
Richard Heck wrote: > I'll ask again: What is the status of the mingw build? Last I heard, it > built our executables fine and the only issue was with building the > installer. The mingw build works fine in several flavours: -natively on windows as described in INSTALL.Win32 (uses autotools) - cross-compiling from linux using development/cmake/scripts/xmingw (uses cmake, depends on an older 32bit qt build offered by Peter which is downloaded) - cross compiling from linux using MXE and autotools as described in INSTALL.Win32 (works for 32 and 64 bit) I did not test the first option myself, this was contributed by a user. For both cross-compilations I also tested the resulting executable with wine and could not see any problem (but of course a test on real windows would be good). The biggest difficulty for cross-compilation is to obtain a suitable qt: It needs to be configured for windows, but all the utilities like moc, uic etc need to run on linux. qt does not offer a binary build for cross- compilation, creating it is much work, but fortunately the nice people from http://mxe.cc do that for us and offer the result in an easy to use form. I am pretty sure that a MXE build could be done with cmake very easily as well, it just needs somebody to do it and to document the needed cmake command line. Concerning the installer I have no idea. Running nsis on wine is supposed to be no problem, but from my experiences with the inaccurate and outdated MSVC instructions in INSTALL.Win32 I would not expect that building the installer works out of the box. However, this is something I'll probably try one day, but first I want to have easy and working instructions to build LyX with MSVC. Even if we do not build the official version with MSVC anymore in the future, it really helps if interested people can use MSVC and maybe become contributors. Georg
Re: new LyX 2.2.0 installer for Windows Vista is available
On 06/25/2016 12:00 PM, Georg Baum wrote: > Uwe Stöhr wrote: > >> Richard, could you please put it on ftp.lyx.org? Could you please also >> write a news message that we now have a Vista installer but that this >> installer should not be used for other Windows versions than Vista. > This is not possible for legal reasons. Our own license forbids to > distribute binaries without corresponding source code. This includes the > build scripts (see https://www.lyx.org/License): > > "The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making > modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all > the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface > definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and > installation of the executable." > > I am preaching since years that every binary we distribute must be built in > a reproducible way from identifiable, publicy available sources (including > the build scripts). > > Currently only our own OS X build and the linux builds offered by Livio and > linux distributors are 100% reproducible. The windows installer is not, the > build instructions are incomplete and partially wrong, and a binary > dependency package is needed which contains unneeded stuff such as old MSVC > dlls. How this binary dependency package was produced is unknown and not > reproducible. > > Adding two binaries from a different source to the installer makes it even > more unreproducible. We need to go into the other direction. That is also > the reason why I spend lots of time for helping others with MSVC and cmake, > although I have zero benefit from it personally. I'll ask again: What is the status of the mingw build? Last I heard, it built our executables fine and the only issue was with building the installer. Richard
Re: new LyX 2.2.0 installer for Windows Vista is available
Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Richard, could you please put it on ftp.lyx.org? Could you please also > write a news message that we now have a Vista installer but that this > installer should not be used for other Windows versions than Vista. This is not possible for legal reasons. Our own license forbids to distribute binaries without corresponding source code. This includes the build scripts (see https://www.lyx.org/License): "The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable." I am preaching since years that every binary we distribute must be built in a reproducible way from identifiable, publicy available sources (including the build scripts). Currently only our own OS X build and the linux builds offered by Livio and linux distributors are 100% reproducible. The windows installer is not, the build instructions are incomplete and partially wrong, and a binary dependency package is needed which contains unneeded stuff such as old MSVC dlls. How this binary dependency package was produced is unknown and not reproducible. Adding two binaries from a different source to the installer makes it even more unreproducible. We need to go into the other direction. That is also the reason why I spend lots of time for helping others with MSVC and cmake, although I have zero benefit from it personally. > Thus please keep use welcome new people and encouraging to join the LyX > developer team. LyX need manpower and I am happy about every new > developer. We also need people developing on Windows. Please stop implying that you are the only one welcoming new people. Everybody welcomes new contributors, especially those who help to get a better windows build. Georg
Re: new LyX 2.2.0 installer for Windows Vista is available
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I am not completely sure why we are having this surreal discussion. Uwe, > what is wrong with the following? > 1/ Dima provides a patch that makes a Vista compatible build > 2/ Kornel checks that the cmake part good enough for inclusion > 3/ Uwe does his usual builds using this new code (the build are still OK > on modern windows, right?) > 4/ Dima gets to check the binaries before we distribute it I would like to see this procedure. Georg
Re: new LyX 2.2.0 installer for Windows Vista is available
Le 25/06/2016 16:45, Richard Heck a écrit : There is a discussion about this topic in the bug tracker that I cannot understand. Scott and Richard are concerned that Dima'S build contains malware. This is not fair. Dima invested some spare time to fiddle around with Qt to prepare a Vista build and to test it. To presume that a new contributor is not trustworthy is not the way we should welcome new people! This is a complete misunderstanding of what Scott and I were saying. We think that our officially releasing a LyX binary on the LyX website, especially one signed with the LyX key, means that we are making certain sorts of guarantees to people. We cannot make those guarantees if the binary has been built by someone we do not at all know. I am not completely sure why we are having this surreal discussion. Uwe, what is wrong with the following? 1/ Dima provides a patch that makes a Vista compatible build 2/ Kornel checks that the cmake part good enough for inclusion 3/ Uwe does his usual builds using this new code (the build are still OK on modern windows, right?) 4/ Dima gets to check the binaries before we distribute it This is not rocket science, is it? Why make it so dramatic? JMarc PS: BTW, did we drop XP support already?
Re: new LyX 2.2.0 installer for Windows Vista is available
On 06/25/2016 05:13 AM, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Dear LyXers, > > there is a new Windows installer available that provides support for > Windows Vista: > http://ftp.lyx.de/LyX%202.2.0/LyX-220-Installer-Vista-3.exe > > Dima kindly prepared the binary from the 2.2.0 tarball, I checked it > against viruses and malware using commercial antivirus software, I > created the installer with it and Dima tested that everything works > fine on Vista. > > Richard, could you please put it on ftp.lyx.org? Could you please also > write a news message that we now have a Vista installer but that this > installer should not be used for other Windows versions than Vista. > > --- > > There is a discussion about this topic in the bug tracker that I > cannot understand. Scott and Richard are concerned that Dima'S build > contains malware. This is not fair. Dima invested some spare time to > fiddle around with Qt to prepare a Vista build and to test it. To > presume that a new contributor is not trustworthy is not the way we > should welcome new people! This is a complete misunderstanding of what Scott and I were saying. We think that our officially releasing a LyX binary on the LyX website, especially one signed with the LyX key, means that we are making certain sorts of guarantees to people. We cannot make those guarantees if the binary has been built by someone we do not at all know. People don't even get commit rights until they've submitted a number of patches and proved themselves capable. > I checked Dima's build wit the anti-virus software at work (the > installer only contains the lyx.exe and tex2lyx.exe from Dima, all > other LyX files are identic with the other installers I released for > 2.2.0. > However, in general, if we don't trust new people investing their > spare time, we will be lost. To dramatize: Some of you have never seen > me, nobody knows my build system and could cross-check if I don't add > spyware to the Win installers. So you have to trust me too. You have been around here rather a long time. > Thus please keep use welcome new people and encouraging to join the > LyX developer team. LyX need manpower and I am happy about every new > developer. We also need people developing on Windows. Obviously. No one is saying we should not encourage Dima to submit patches and ultimately gain commit rights. This is an entirely different issue. Richard
