On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 13:56, MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK) <ian.macart...@selexgalileo.com> wrote: > >> I don't know how "community devpaks" servers are organized, but I see >> that: > > Nor do we... > >> 1. the 1.1.9 package was done by www.bibosoft.de Do you recognize >> this webiste? Some active contributor to FLTK? > > Don't know - maybe that was Dejan's stuff? (Though that's a guess.) He's not > around much these days, worked and all that... > > >> In computer science, we are always taught "not to reinvent the wheel", >> ie not to waste time and effort to do basic things which are already >> done (at least it's supposed to be done by contributions by others) -- >> instead we'd better use our time on advanced things. > > Indeed, you are absolutely correct here, but have perhaps grasped the wrong > end of the stick - and therein lies the problem; we already have packaging > mechanisms that work flawlessly, yet the IDE people all seem to think they > need to invent some new, incompatible, mechanism. Which then is never > adequately supported and causes fragmentation. (Though note that some tools > do know how to work with tarballs directly, so I have to assume that the > Dev-C++ folk decided on purpose to do something else... What did they hope to > achieve? I do not know.) > > The only "correct" way to install fltk is from the tarballs, which work > everywhere. All other package formats are a resource sapping distraction. > > >> I consider myself as most of "simple" users in the sense that I don't >> want to spend a lot of time in basic things before I could do the real >> job. If I can't get to the main target after spending quite a lot of >> time working around obstacles, I'd just forget about it and look at >> something else, even though that "something else" might be considered >> as "inferior" as people, but at least it works. We, simple users, are >> pragmatic! > > Um, how hard is it to install fltk? If you are going to construct any piece > of software that is non-trivial, then unpacking the fltk tarballs is well > within your abilities, however "simple" you may perceive your own abilities > to be. > > Open a terminal (not that tricky) > Unpack the tarball (tar -jxf fltk-whatever.bz2) > Change in to the package folder (cd fltk-whatever) > Build fltk (make) > > Job done. Now all you need to do is set the include and lib paths in your IDE > (which you already know how to do) so that they point at the fltk-whatever > folder, and the job's a good 'un... > > Where's the hard part? This process is identical to almost every other lib > I've ever used, and is well known, and if not known is a directly pertinent > thing to learn, so... I'm at a loss to understand why... > > Also, note that if you are using Dev-C++ on Windows, then under the covers > you are using the mingw toolchain - which comes with the Msys terminal shell; > from within that shell, using mingw on Windows is "identical" to using gcc on > Linux, for most practical purposes, so things learned on one host system then > become directly relevant on the others; surely that is a useful and > advantageous position from which to develop your code? > IDE's of any sort (all of them) are essentially a form of walled garden and > constrain your use to the workflow and targets they envisage - in the end, > that is not an advantage...
First of all, I never said it's hard nor did I use this adjective. I don't know which "end" you're referring to, but my starting point is that of someone living in the 21st century, not someone back in the 80's! And my viewpoint is linked to IDE which is the way to go to make professional stuff. It's like cooking. What you've suggested to do is like: 1. go to kill the cow and cut off the meat we want 2. get the pepper seeds from the tree and grind them to powder 3. collect some sunflower seeds and make the oil (there are also salt and other ingredients, but it's just an example and it's already long enough) before doing the real cooking! Note that I'm 100% capable of doing all these three basic tasks. Are they "hard"? As you say, it's matter of perception but they are not hard for my standard. But whether it's hard or not, for me it's always a "No I'm not interested to do that", what I like to do (and probably most of "simple" people in the world) is to *buy cut meat, ground pepper and a bottle of oil* to make a *good* meal. That's it! DIY might be fun, for some, but it's not always fun for all. Your procedure contains a lot of "patching", which gives the image of lack of professionalism. What's cool is like in Eclipse (or better, in Netbean), where you could download needed component and it's "code and go!" without much hassle. Moreover, the procedure you've given, it's probably hidden in some README file inside the bz2 ball -- but not in some webpage. This way of doing thing is very out-dated. Well, all I had said is for the good-being of your FLTK. It's *hard* to accept, and if you don't want to listen, it's totally up to you. _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list fltk-dev@easysw.com http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
