or not, I cannot judge). BPBible uses VC++ to build Sword binaries to
make it work with the standard Python distribution on Windows.
Just so you know, it's completely possible to build the Sword binaries
and the Python SWIG bindings with MinGW on Windows, and have them work
with the standard
Jonathan Morgan wrote (after quoting my entire lengthy message):
In my opinon, the expected compiler to be used for Windows binaries is
VC++, whether it is proprietary or not (for example, ask Mozilla, or
OpenOffice, or Python).
Expected by whom? Microsoft does not provide a compiler and
I'll just say once again, that the sword binaries people are looking
for at this point, is BibleCS 1.6.0 (which doesn't exist yet). There
is *no* method of compiling this with gcc, so there's no point in even
attempting it. The binaries of SWORD itself (including the utilities)
are already
Hi Jonathan,
Visual Studio is the best way to compile on Windows. I used to compile with
mingw + msys, but the environment feels slow and clumsy, and it produces
larger, slower executables. And Visual Studio is free - you can download the
express editions.
Visual Studio seems to me much easier
Matthew Talbert wrote:
The binaries of SWORD itself (including the utilities) are already
available and have been available since very soon after the release
of 1.6.0, both from Crosswire and packaged with Xiphos.
This would seem to suggest that the Xiphos 3.1.1a -supplied version of
Jonathan Marsden wrote:
This would seem to suggest that the Xiphos 3.1.1a -supplied version of
osis2mod, which says it is r2169, is really r2400 (1.6.0) or later, in
disguise? It doesn't appear to have the -d option or the -v option ...
It *does* have -v, my mistake. But r2169 is from May
This would seem to suggest that the Xiphos 3.1.1a -supplied version of
osis2mod, which says it is r2169, is really r2400 (1.6.0) or later, in
disguise? It doesn't appear to have the -d option or the -v option (its
help output lacks them, at least).
Yes, actually it is a more recent version
I thought this is the kind of use case we are talking about here --
people (SWORD power users, if you like) wanting current SWORD code (in
binary form) for Windows, because the recent SWORD library svn versions
have bug fixes and enhancements which earlier, released, SWORD binaries
for
Hi Matthew,
Please see
http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/Talk:Tutorial:Compiling_%26_Installing_SWORD
http://www.crosswire.org/wiki/Talk:Tutorial:Compiling_%26_Installing_SWORD
Let's have the useful stuff where it is easily accessed.
David
Matthew Talbert wrote:
Are you wanting:
1.
Matthew Talbert wrote:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Gerald Zimmerman cyberko...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have an additional request. Windows, as delivered, makes everything easy for
frontenders but ignores any thirst for the knowledge of compiling. I suspect
that any of us Windows users
I am not a programmer ( I'm a wanna be) but have access to MS Visual Studio
6, 2005 2008, so options 1 and 3 would be the most beneficial for me. I
think having all of these options documented on the wiki as David Haslam has
suggested would be valuable.
Feel free to put this on the wiki :)
Matthew Talbert wrote:
I am not a programmer ( I'm a wanna be) but have access to MS Visual Studio
6, 2005 2008, so options 1 and 3 would be the most beneficial for me. I
think having all of these options documented on the wiki as David Haslam has
suggested would be valuable.
Feel free
Matthew Talbert wrote:
I am not a programmer ( I'm a wanna be) but have access to MS Visual Studio
6, 2005 2008, so options 1 and 3 would be the most beneficial for me. I
think having all of these options documented on the wiki as David Haslam has
suggested would be valuable.
Feel free to
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 4:03 AM, Jonathan Marsden jmars...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Jonathan Morgan wrote (after quoting my entire lengthy message):
In my opinon, the expected compiler to be used for Windows binaries is
VC++, whether it is proprietary or not (for example, ask Mozilla, or
14 matches
Mail list logo
