Cendio is going to finance the project, so I will be beginning work on the new CMake build system within the next week. I need to do some investigation first to get a feel for how to do cross-compilation, host detection, feature checking, and other things that will eventually be necessary when porting the Unix build from autotools to the new system. Then I will proceed with Phase 1, which is developing a build system for the Windows code that allows building binaries using Visual C++ or MinGW, and build instructions for native Windows as well as Linux cross-compile environments. This code will be checked in, so that people can evaluate it while I work on porting the Unix build system.
I'll keep everyone posted. On 10/5/10 9:58 AM, Adam Tkac wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 01:49:57PM -0400, Robert Goley wrote: >> Hmm... That may be my problem. I have been trying to build >> against 7.5 or the git repo. I haven't tried 7.4 since before the >> TLS stuff was officially added. I will try 7.4 again and post my >> results. Noticed the typo in the last email. I meant TigerVNC of >> course.... > > Hello all, > > let me put my two cents in. > > Finally I agree we should not use MinGW for building on Windows, this is > my major cons against MinGW: > > 1. There is problem with MinGW upstream, they have too strict > patch-accepting policy. Known example is my "CLSID_ActiveDesktop" > patch which is currently needed to build winvnc4 on Windows via MinGW. > In future we might hit this problem again which is not so nice. > Note I don't say MinGW's policy is bad, it simply is as is. However > occasional TigerVNC developers need to use custom patched MinGW build > system and I'm sure it's not so easy for middle-experienced Windows > developer who is not familiar with GNU build system to get it working. > > 2. This is purely subjective point, I don't like MinGW on Windows > much. In my opinion it simply doesn't fit into Windows style and I > prefer to use for example Visual Studio debugger, etc. > > I checked scons and cmake build systems and in my opinion cmake is the > right tool for us. With cmake I'm able to generate Makefiles on Linux > and use standard Linux tools, like gcc, make and gdb. On Windows > I'm able to generate VS project files and then use standard tools, > like msvc + headers + libs and VS's debugger. Note it's also possible > to generate MinGW makefiles on Windows so people who like MinGW won't > suffer from this change. CMake is far more flexible for our style of > development than GNU build chain. > > Note about Xvnc compilation. It's true we cannot use CMake for it. > However common/rfb/librfb.a can be compiled via CMake and then > Xvnc (with X.Org's GNU build system) can be linked against it. This > means we will maintain only unix/xserver/hw/Makefile.am. > > In my opinion we should consider to use CMake instead of GNU build > chain as our primary build system in 1.1. If I understand correctly > Darrell is also for CMake but I would like to hear opinion of Peter > and Pierre. > > My vote is +1 for CMake in TigerVNC 1.1. > > Regards, Adam > >>> Me too! That is why I'm willing to work on the CMake system. I haven't >>> yet been able to successfully build the Windows code myself, except for >>> just VNCViewer (which is painful because of all the MinGW dependencies.) >>> >>> As far as building on Lenny, I'm surprised that using build-xorg doesn't >>> work for you. That method, when used with the Xorg 7.4 code base, >>> should be backward compatible all the way back to RHEL 4 and its >>> contemporaries (Ubuntu 6, etc.) >>> >>> On 9/30/10 8:46 AM, Robert Goley wrote: >>>> I realize it would never completely replace autotools. I was just >>>> hoping for wrapper that would work a bit better. I haven't had that >>>> much luck with compiling TigerVNC on Lenny yet. The client stuff works >>>> fine but even compiling the whole Xorg tree for dependencies has not >>>> worked yet... May have just been my frustration coming thru... The >>>> Windows platform is next on my list and history tells me it never plays >>>> nice (MSVC or MinGW). I really want to start working with TightVNC's >>>> TLS connections. I applaud the work all the developers have done and >>>> look forward to when I can actually get to use it. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb _______________________________________________ Tigervnc-devel mailing list Tigervnc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tigervnc-devel
