On 04/09/18 18:26, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
Hi!
I'm looking for a way to update ICU in Windows.
I also think we should just stop to save few megabytes customizing ICU.
+1
--
Check out the vibrant tech
On Monday 17 February 2014 20:39:38 Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> On 02/17/14 20:27, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> > On 17/02/2014 13:08, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> >> 17.02.2014 17:01, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> >>> - The data file is common for win32 and win64. If we include the bina
Firebird is not so heavy on external projects
LibreOffice it is
for example in exernal 625M total
for firebird for example they have a make file and a script to extract
it also a set of patches for it
https://gitorious.org/libreoffice/core/source/685ec1899435037205d98a102a32ca8b6a4836d0:external/f
Hi,
>This way those who know what they have installed can save traffic.
Traffic does not matter anymore.
Regards,
Alexey Kovyazin
--
Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
Take advantage of what the Clo
On 02/17/14 20:47, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> On 17/02/2014 13:39, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
>> The problem for me is not bytes. I dislike a whole approach called
>> 'Everything needed for windows build should be present in single
>> repository'. I think that building firebird anyway requires
On 17/02/2014 13:39, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> The problem for me is not bytes. I dislike a whole approach called
> 'Everything needed for windows build should be present in single
> repository'. I think that building firebird anyway requires at lease
> minimum qualification (without it - why build
On 02/17/14 20:27, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> On 17/02/2014 13:08, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
>> 17.02.2014 17:01, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>> - The data file is common for win32 and win64. If we include the binary
>>> files in our source repository (and I think we should) it'
17.02.2014 17:27, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> I estimate a very few number of files summing around 15 MB.
>
> This is much less than current ICU 3 sources, with thousand files
> summing 50 MB and nobody died yet.
So, there are three options:
1) Sources in repository (50 MB)
2) Binarie
On 17/02/2014 13:08, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 17.02.2014 17:01, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>> - The data file is common for win32 and win64. If we include the binary
>> files in our source repository (and I think we should) it's less megabytes.
>>
>> Do you agree with above?
>I disa
17.02.2014 17:01, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> - The data file is common for win32 and win64. If we include the binary
> files in our source repository (and I think we should) it's less megabytes.
>
> Do you agree with above?
I disagree with including these files into the repository.
On 17/02/2014 07:49, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> Adriano,
>
>> It seems that Windows people decided that a multi-megabyte library
>> should not be included in Firebird.
> IIRC, the ICU site had an ability to generate stripped libs online. Is
> that still possible? We might use that for officially dist
Adriano,
> It seems that Windows people decided that a multi-megabyte library
> should not be included in Firebird.
IIRC, the ICU site had an ability to generate stripped libs online. Is
that still possible? We might use that for officially distributed
packages and let people dealing with multi
On 17/02/2014 05:57, Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> On 02/14/14 21:52, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>> On 14/02/2014 15:35, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>>> 14.02.2014 21:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>>
> Why to compile ICU by hands at all? What's wrong with precompiled
> binaries?
>>>
2014-02-17 12:57 GMT+04:00 Alex Peshkoff :
> I was always against adding a lot of standard foreign code to our tree.
> Going this way we may end with having compiler and C-library in it :)
>
> So please let's avoid a lot of foreign libraries in our tree. For me
> it's not a question of src size (at
On Monday 17 February 2014 09:38:44 Alex Peshkoff wrote:
> On 02/15/14 11:45, Paul Reeves wrote:
> > On Friday 14 February 2014 18:24:40 Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> >> 14.02.2014 18:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> >>> If not, build will not be simple and may need extra download.
> >>
> >>
On 02/14/14 21:52, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> On 14/02/2014 15:35, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>> 14.02.2014 21:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>
Why to compile ICU by hands at all? What's wrong with precompiled binaries?
>>> That is a interesting question.
>>>
>>> Would nee
On 02/15/14 11:45, Paul Reeves wrote:
> On Friday 14 February 2014 18:24:40 Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
>> 14.02.2014 18:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>>> If not, build will not be simple and may need extra download.
>> It already needs extra downloads: unixtools, Inno Setup, Visual Stu
On Friday 14 February 2014 18:24:40 Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 14.02.2014 18:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> > If not, build will not be simple and may need extra download.
>
>It already needs extra downloads: unixtools, Inno Setup, Visual Studio.
This is not strictly true.
Obvious
On 14/02/2014 15:35, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> 14.02.2014 21:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>
>>> Why to compile ICU by hands at all? What's wrong with precompiled binaries?
>>>
>> That is a interesting question.
>>
>> Would need to choose if include binaries in the repository or not.
>>
>>
Does Firebird use cmake? If so, cmake has a "find_package" mechanism
that is platform, compiler, and version independent. If Firebird
doesn't use cmake, well, it should.
I haven't looked at this, but there is a package definition at
https://github.com/julp/FindICU.cmake.
On 2/14/2014 11:57
14.02.2014 21:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
>> Why to compile ICU by hands at all? What's wrong with precompiled binaries?
>>
> That is a interesting question.
>
> Would need to choose if include binaries in the repository or not.
>
> If not, build will not be simple and may need extra d
14.02.2014 18:16, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote:
> If not, build will not be simple and may need extra download.
It already needs extra downloads: unixtools, Inno Setup, Visual Studio. One
download
more will change nothing.
--
WBR, SD.
--
Adriano,
> With older ICU, you probably used Visual Studio to upgrade older format
> to newer one.
>
> Now, the inverse will be necessary. AFAIK, Nickolay used something for
> this, but I don't know if it was fully functional or needed manual edits.
>
> But note, ICU has not only vcxproj files. It
On 14/02/2014 15:03, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
> 14.02.2014 17:57, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
>> if someone still
>> wants to use a prior version for development, why cannot he spend some
>> time and create appropriate solution/project files for ICU?
>Why to compile ICU by hands at all? What's wrong
On 14/02/2014 14:57, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> Adriano,
>
>> ICU 5.2 comes only with MSVC 10 build. It should not be "possible" for
>> us to create solution for older MSVC.
>>
>> Are we prepared for this?
> Sorry, I don't get why it should not be possible for us? Our official
> compiler for v3 is MS
Adriano,
> ICU 5.2 comes only with MSVC 10 build. It should not be "possible" for
> us to create solution for older MSVC.
>
> Are we prepared for this?
Sorry, I don't get why it should not be possible for us? Our official
compiler for v3 is MSVC10 -- so far so good -- but if someone still
wants
14.02.2014 17:57, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
> if someone still
> wants to use a prior version for development, why cannot he spend some
> time and create appropriate solution/project files for ICU?
Why to compile ICU by hands at all? What's wrong with precompiled binaries?
--
WBR, SD.
---
27 matches
Mail list logo
