Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Jürgen Spitzmüller lyx.org> writes: > > Joost Verburg wrote: > > On 8/5/2010 3:34 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > It is not our responsibility to tell people what OS to use... > > > > Sure. I'm just saying that at some point it doesn't make sense to > > support an OS anymore. Windows 2000 is more than 10 years old and no > > longer supported by Microsoft. It's market share is close to 0%. > > Also note that forthcoming MikTeX version 2.9 will also not run anymore on > Win > 2000: > http://blog.miktex.org/post/2010/08/MiKTeX-29-system-requirements.aspx > > Jürgen > > I also saw Miktex 2.9 is no longer supporting W2K. I was running MikTeX 2.6 in one of my machines until now, and just updated to MikTeX 2.8 version. Usually MKTX versions are supported for, say, 4 or 5 years. Thx. Jose
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Joost Verburg wrote: > The standard installer includes more recent version of external > libraries, which have been compiled with Visual C++ 2010 and therefore > don't run on Windows 2000. The alternative installer still uses the > older ones. Then we have to update the homepage and the wiki, which still claim that Win 2k is supported. Is Windows 7 now actually considered "supported"? Jürgen
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Joost Verburg wrote: > On 8/5/2010 3:34 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > It is not our responsibility to tell people what OS to use... > > Sure. I'm just saying that at some point it doesn't make sense to > support an OS anymore. Windows 2000 is more than 10 years old and no > longer supported by Microsoft. It's market share is close to 0%. Also note that forthcoming MikTeX version 2.9 will also not run anymore on Win 2000: http://blog.miktex.org/post/2010/08/MiKTeX-29-system-requirements.aspx Jürgen
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes lyx.org> writes: > > Le 5 août 10 à 22:03, Joost Verburg a écrit : > > I understand that it's nice to support as many versions as possible, > > but I simply don't have the time to maintain all the dependencies (> > > 10 MSVC projects) for different compiler versions. I had to pick a > > version for the recent updates and considered MSVC 2010 to be the > > best future-proof option. > > My question was about what the cost is for us, and this lqst > explanation gives me the answer. > > Go ahead, we'll see if the complaints become too common. > > JMarc > Dear Jean-Marc and Joost Thank you very much for your answer. I understand that compiling with an old compiler tool-chain is painfull, and doubles the work. I also know Microsoft killed Win 2K and stopped security updates a few months ago. This issue already happened a few weeks ago with Scite/Scintilla which also doesn't run anymore in Win 2K (since version 2.12), and of course will further get worse in the future with more applications being compiled with new compiler versions. However, in my two workplaces I still have PCs with Win 2K (professional version) and I'm somewhat proud to say that in 8 years I've never had to reinstall the OS due to security reasons (one of my hard drives broke once, but that doesn't count :-). Also, in my home there is stil another Win2K machine, exposed to the harsh security environment of a commercial Internet provider. Win 2K is quite less bloated than XP, Vista :-) and W7. Of course whenever my 8-year old PCs will broke I'll move to W7. The virtual machine solution (e.g. VmWare, Virtual box) is not very good for a 8 year old single processor: Lyx compiling of 10-20 pages documents with figures, or slides, is already a bit slow due to scripts running behind, and that would worsen behind a virtual machine. For know I stick with the alternate Lyx installer, which I think will work well (I'll test it thoroughly after student classes' start next September, I use Lyx to writing problems, lab sheets, small note sets, etc...). In case the alternate installer reveals problems, I'll revert to 1.6.6.1 Lyx version, which I used often without severe problems (one or other crash, sometimes, when editing math expressions) until I eventually upgrade my work PCs. Thank you very much again for your answers, Jean-Marc and Joost. Kind Regards Jose
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Le 5 août 10 à 22:03, Joost Verburg a écrit : I understand that it's nice to support as many versions as possible, but I simply don't have the time to maintain all the dependencies (> 10 MSVC projects) for different compiler versions. I had to pick a version for the recent updates and considered MSVC 2010 to be the best future-proof option. My question was about what the cost is for us, and this lqst explanation gives me the answer. Go ahead, we'll see if the complaints become too common. JMarc
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
On 8/5/2010 3:34 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: It is not our responsibility to tell people what OS to use... Sure. I'm just saying that at some point it doesn't make sense to support an OS anymore. Windows 2000 is more than 10 years old and no longer supported by Microsoft. It's market share is close to 0%. I understand that it's nice to support as many versions as possible, but I simply don't have the time to maintain all the dependencies (> 10 MSVC projects) for different compiler versions. I had to pick a version for the recent updates and considered MSVC 2010 to be the best future-proof option. Joost
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Le 5 août 10 à 21:06, Joost Verburg a écrit : Not arbitrarily. Windows 2000 support has already been discontinued by Microsoft so it's highly unsafe to use. Security issues are not being fixed. Most recent software doesn't support Windows 2000. It is not our responsibility to tell people what OS to use... The main reason I used MSVC 2010 when porting all the new dependencies to Windows is because it would take a lot of time to upgrade everything to 2010 later. This would have been necessary soon when 2008 is no longer available. You are the one who gets to decide, anyway. JMarc
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
On 8/5/2010 2:17 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Do we gain something by compiling with the latest toolchain? Aren't we shuttig down windows 2000 arbitrarily? Not arbitrarily. Windows 2000 support has already been discontinued by Microsoft so it's highly unsafe to use. Security issues are not being fixed. Most recent software doesn't support Windows 2000. The main reason I used MSVC 2010 when porting all the new dependencies to Windows is because it would take a lot of time to upgrade everything to 2010 later. This would have been necessary soon when 2008 is no longer available. Joost
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Le 5 août 10 à 20:05, Joost Verburg a écrit : On 8/4/2010 1:43 PM, Jose Augusto wrote: The standard installer includes more recent version of external libraries, which have been compiled with Visual C++ 2010 and therefore don't run on Windows 2000. The alternative installer still uses the older ones. Do we gain something by compiling with the latest toolchain? Aren't we shuttig down windows 2000 arbitrarily? JMarc
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
On 8/4/2010 1:43 PM, Jose Augusto wrote: This is an update and answer to myself :-) : I was able to install>> and RUN on Win 2K<< the last version of the Lyx alt-installer which can be retrieved at the link: http://prdownload.berlios.de/lyxwininstall/LyX-167-4-25-AltInstaller-Complete.exe The standard installer includes more recent version of external libraries, which have been compiled with Visual C++ 2010 and therefore don't run on Windows 2000. The alternative installer still uses the older ones. Microsoft already stopped Windows 2000 support so there will be no more security updates. Therefore I don't think it makes sense to keep supporting it. Joost
Re: Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Jose Augusto fc.ul.pt> writes: > > Dear Lyx developers and Windows binaries' compilers > > First of all, thank you very much for your commitment > and work in the development of this project. > > Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 windows binaries don't run under Windows 2000. > The last version to run OK was 1.6.6-1. I suspect that the compiler version > used for this version has changed, and the generated binaries no longer > run in Win 2K. > ... > > Jose This is an update and answer to myself :-) : I was able to install >> and RUN on Win 2K << the last version of the Lyx alt-installer which can be retrieved at the link: http://prdownload.berlios.de/lyxwininstall/LyX-167-4-25-AltInstaller-Complete.exe Hope it helps other Win 2K Lyx users. Kind Regards, Jose
Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 don't run in Windows 2000 (aka win 2K)
Dear Lyx developers and Windows binaries' compilers First of all, thank you very much for your commitment and work in the development of this project. Lyx 1.6.7-3 and 1.6.7-4 windows binaries don't run under Windows 2000. The last version to run OK was 1.6.6-1. I suspect that the compiler version used for this version has changed, and the generated binaries no longer run in Win 2K. So, I would like to know if this is the reason and, in case it is, if it will not revert in the future. i.e., if Win 2K is no longer supported in future Lyx windows versions. Kind Regards, Jose
