On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Gilles Caulier <caulier.gil...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/11/5 Thomas Friedrichsmeier <thomas.friedrichsme...@ruhr-uni-bochum.de>: >> Hi, >> >> On Thursday 04 November 2010, Patrick Spendrin wrote: >>> KDE on Windows building/packaging works this way: >> >> ok, let's focus on creating a 4.5.x release. So far, it seems to me the >> greatest obstacles are: >> >> 1) Only few people really know what precisely needs to be done to create a >> release. Your sketch certainly helps understanding some of the major steps. >> But still, I for one simply wouldn't know where to start. So I'm hoping for >> very specifc instructions. Naturally, there will be problems of all sorts on >> the way, and you can hardly anticipate and document all of that. But in an >> ideal world, what would be the sequence of commands needed to create a >> release? >> >> 2) Creating a release is a daunting task, and it's hard to split up into more >> managable portions. Let's break this one up some more, into mostly >> independent >> problems: >> >> 2a) Packaging dependencies: Alright, I can see the pain involved. But are >> missing dependencies really still an issue for a 4.5.x release? If so, do you >> have a list (complete or not) of which ones in particular? I guess it should >> be possible to split up at least this point among several people, easily. > > From digiKam viewpoint, the next 2.0.0 release will require OpenCV > library for face detection stuff. > > On my Win7, it compile fine with TDM-GCC and MSVC2008. It's a libary > managed by Cmake. So it's easy to include as windows installer package > >> >> 2b) I keep stumbling across the "multitude of compilers" issue. If ressources >> are this limited, then trying to package for several compilers at once looks >> totally counter-productive to me at this point of time. I've stated before >> that I'm all for dropping everything except MinGW4-32bit from the installer, >> but I guess this idea won't be accepted (I'd still appreciate any direct >> feedback, though). > > From a developer viewpoint, to have at least Mingw4-32 + MSVC is very > instructive. Some warnings/errors can be see with GCC, some others > with M$ compiler. both are complementary. > > I never run digiKam & co using MSVC bin, for a simple reason : it > crash at start up due a binary uncompatibility between KDE4 packages > compiled with MSVC 2006 and digiKam compiled with MSVC2008 > > I always use GCC. All compile and run fine. > > From an user viewpoint it's a very confuse situation. Why 2 compiler > packages version exist... Only one is enough.
+1 So the compiler choice could be hidden from the normal user but it should stay the way it is now from a developer's POV. Having different compilers go trough the code is really good thing. Regards, Cristian Onet _______________________________________________ Kde-windows mailing list Kde-windows@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-windows