Re: MS Visual C++ Version
On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 01:58:16PM -0400, Laine Stump wrote: It doesn't. VC4 uses makefiles (.mak), VC5 and VC6 use project and workspace files (.dsp and .dsw). This is known as progress. Not! Why not provide both versions? - Make a subdirectory for each VC++ version and put that version's funky project/workspace/makefile/xml/whatever's in there. - Add a step to the documentation for building CVS on a WinXX system: copy the devkit-specific files from the appropriate subdirectory to wherever the devkit will look for them. - Explicitly disclaim any promises to keep old versions up to date. A good way to do that last would be to move the build files for old versions of VC++ to contrib, and keep only the files for the current version in the main CVS distribution. Or, more generally, bless exactly one VC++ version -- whether the most recent or an older one. Keep the blessed version's files in the main distribution, and move the rest to contrib. I think that whoever is donating the time to maintain the make/project files for VC should do it in whatever format is the most convenient for them, and everyone else should either live with it, or donate *their* time to supply project files for the older/newer versions. This is a good criterion for determining which VC++ version to bless at any given time. -- | | /\ |-_|/ Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | / With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. - RFC 1925 (quoting an unnamed source) ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
Re: MS Visual C++ Version
Hi, When VC70 comes out there is no problem at all, because it uses totally different file format as well as a new extension for those new files. The workspace is now called a solution (*.sln) and a project files are in XML format with the extension vcproj (*.vcproj). I am not sure whether VC40 reads a VC60, but I would think so. Anyway, I have isntalled my VC50 recently just for the very purpose of trying to build CVS from source and I might send a fixed project file(the missing annotate.c) if nobody does so faster than me. I think it is a good idea to keep the files under VC50 format unless somone can provide the VC60 version that uses some VC60 features which improve the build version (not present in older versions that is). I would love, however, to have a zip files of the sources being exported to Windows machine or I would have to ftp an untared and ungzipped sources from my Unix box. I think it would really be nice if we have the zip file available to download from cvshome.org so folks that don't have a Unix box at hand can eventually try to build the stuff. Best Regards, Jerzy - Original Message - From: Dennis Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jerzy Kaczorowski [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 3:07 AM Subject: Re: MS Visual C++ Version If VC 5.0 correctly loads 6.0 project files, then I guess I don't really have a problem with updating the projects, but what happens when 7.0 comes out? I do not plan to ever upgrade my VC++ beyond 5.0, and there might be other persons who are in the same boat (possibly even 4.2 users). (Does VC 4.2 correctly load 6.0 project files?) The problem with updating the project files to version 6.0 is that it opens the door to updating them again (to version 7.0, or newer), and the older VC++ environments might not be as happy loading 7.0 (or newer) project files as they seem to be loading 6.0 project files. As soon as the project file format changes significantly enough, older environments will stop working. - Dennis - Original Message - From: Jerzy Kaczorowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Dennis Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Derek R. Price [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 11:52 AM Subject: Re: MS Visual C++ Version Hi, It will most likely work OK if you feed VC++ 5.0 with the VC60 project, workspace or makefiles. VC50 ignores the unknown flags from VC60 all together and I believe that VC60 has a greater audience so less people will struggle with it if the version would be 6.0. The project files that are in the CVS sources seem to be for version 5.0. I would say that a working files for any version are far better than not working ones. Either one would do. Actually I noticed one more problem for windows source distribution - the sources are having a Unixy line endings. VC++ can handle that for source files, but not for project files. I am also curious as to how could a project file for zlib be missing - it seems to be properly tagged so if the export was done using a release tag then it should be there, no? Best Regards, Jerzy - Original Message - From: Dennis Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Derek R. Price [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 8:21 AM Subject: Re: MS Visual C++ Version Yes, I use VC++ 5.0. - Dennis - Original Message - From: Derek R. Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 3:14 PM Subject: MS Visual C++ Version Hey all, Just curious if anybody is still using some version of MSVC++ earlier than 6.0 to compile CVS on Windows platforms? In other words, is it still important to keep the project and make files generated by 4.0, as is currently the case? Derek -- Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org ) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] CollabNet ( http://collab.net ) -- The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits. - Thomas Jefferson ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
Re: MS Visual C++ Version
Jerzy Kaczorowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When VC70 comes out there is no problem at all, because it uses totally different file format as well as a new extension for those new files. The workspace is now called a solution (*.sln) and a project files are in XML format with the extension vcproj (*.vcproj). I am not sure whether VC40 reads a VC60, but I would think so. It doesn't. VC4 uses makefiles (.mak), VC5 and VC6 use project and workspace files (.dsp and .dsw). I think it is a good idea to keep the files under VC50 format unless somone can provide the VC60 version that uses some VC60 features which improve the build version (not present in older versions that is). I think that whoever is donating the time to maintain the make/project files for VC should do it in whatever format is the most convenient for them, and everyone else should either live with it, or donate *their* time to supply project files for the older/newer versions. ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
Re: MS Visual C++ Version
If VC 5.0 correctly loads 6.0 project files, then I guess I don't really have a problem with updating the projects, but what happens when 7.0 comes out? I do not plan to ever upgrade my VC++ beyond 5.0, and there might be other persons who are in the same boat (possibly even 4.2 users). (Does VC 4.2 correctly load 6.0 project files?) The problem with updating the project files to version 6.0 is that it opens the door to updating them again (to version 7.0, or newer), and the older VC++ environments might not be as happy loading 7.0 (or newer) project files as they seem to be loading 6.0 project files. As soon as the project file format changes significantly enough, older environments will stop working. - Dennis - Original Message - From: Jerzy Kaczorowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Dennis Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Derek R. Price [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 11:52 AM Subject: Re: MS Visual C++ Version Hi, It will most likely work OK if you feed VC++ 5.0 with the VC60 project, workspace or makefiles. VC50 ignores the unknown flags from VC60 all together and I believe that VC60 has a greater audience so less people will struggle with it if the version would be 6.0. The project files that are in the CVS sources seem to be for version 5.0. I would say that a working files for any version are far better than not working ones. Either one would do. Actually I noticed one more problem for windows source distribution - the sources are having a Unixy line endings. VC++ can handle that for source files, but not for project files. I am also curious as to how could a project file for zlib be missing - it seems to be properly tagged so if the export was done using a release tag then it should be there, no? Best Regards, Jerzy - Original Message - From: Dennis Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Derek R. Price [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 8:21 AM Subject: Re: MS Visual C++ Version Yes, I use VC++ 5.0. - Dennis - Original Message - From: Derek R. Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 3:14 PM Subject: MS Visual C++ Version Hey all, Just curious if anybody is still using some version of MSVC++ earlier than 6.0 to compile CVS on Windows platforms? In other words, is it still important to keep the project and make files generated by 4.0, as is currently the case? Derek -- Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org ) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] CollabNet ( http://collab.net ) -- The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits. - Thomas Jefferson ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
Re: MS Visual C++ Version
Jerzy Kaczorowski writes: I am also curious as to how could a project file for zlib be missing - it seems to be properly tagged so if the export was done using a release tag then it should be there, no? The release isn't made by just tarring up an export, there are specific targets in the Makefiles to create the distribution directory structure, make any generated files, set reasonable permissions, cleanup any unwanted files, etc.. Since it was missing from DISTFILES in the zlib Makefile, it didn't get bundled up into the distribution. -Larry Jones Philistines. -- Calvin ___ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
